Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Atheist Pope Richard Dawkins has bared his barren soul yet again, this time on Twitter.
Earlier today, someone mused how they would handle a pregnancy if the fetus was found to have Down syndrome, calling it a serious ethical dilemma. Pish posh! Matters of life and death are dead simple to Professor Dawkins.
@InYourFaceNYer Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world if you have the choice.
— Richard Dawkins (@RichardDawkins) August 20, 2014
The Oxford professor claimed that he is no fan of eugenics, but those with Down syndrome simply have nothing positive to contribute. This is “elementary moral philosophy,” he sniffed, and if you’re too dim to get that, you really should buy his books.
Dawkins burst into pop consciousness with his 2006 harangue The God Delusion, where he channeled the New Atheists’ id. Non-belief wasn’t enough for this breed, which instead required invective against anyone who dared disagree with their fundamentalist godlessness.
But where Dawkins was once praised, he’s now criticized for a string of controversial statements thought to have damaged the atheist brand.
Last month he claimed that “mild” pedophilia isn’t as bad as violent pedophilia and “stranger rape” is worse than date rape. His recent dismissiveness toward sexual harassment and Islam in general has incensed long-time allies on the left such as the editors of The Guardian.
While many religious believers were initially concerned about New Atheists’ emergence as the face of non-belief, in retrospect it was a movement doomed to fail. While the majority of atheists are content to live among agnostics and Buddhists and seekers and Christians, Dawkins’ Jesuitical core of anti-theists are defined by intolerance, hatred and the worst anti-social behavior.
Anyone who has survived the intellectual insecurity and joyless evangelizing of a Dawkins devotee walks away with a decidedly negative view of the movement. As a result, atheists are now more likely to apologize for Dawkins than defend him.
At its best, religion offers what Spock-like rationality cannot. Compassion. Forgiveness. Beauty. Grace.
When most people read of a medical missionary who gives his life for strangers dying of Ebola, witnesses a raucous Holi festival, or visits the Notre Dame de Paris, they’re filled with awe and wonder. Dawkins’ denomination spits upon all three while ridiculing any observers who admired the sight.
Even if your head tells you there is nothing beyond our brief life on this spinning rock, with whom would you rather spend those 70-some years? A dour moral scold like Dawkins, or a friendly, fulfilled believer?