Richard Dawkin's Vs Down's Syndrome

Post date: Aug 22, 2014 3:14:10 PM

I found out that Richard Dawkins tweeted the following in response to someone expecting a downs syndrome child.

""Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world if you have the choice.""

OK, this is not only insensitive to those who have downs syndrome children, but it is also a very strong sign of Dawkin's world view.

Dawkins (an atheist) claims that there is no God. Dawkins further proclaims that life came about through evolutionary processes. This is no surprise.

The evolutionist believes that humans are no more than the latest evolution on a million year long process. The passing fad of humanity may be more advanced than other creatures but humans are still animals according to evolution. Humans are super primates. Sweet, right?

The problem with this world view is this:

If humans are evolved animals

Humans kill and eat animals

What is to stop a human from killing another human?

Dawkins will claim that there are moral norms that we must all adhere to for society to work. Dawkins can't cite an origin for those social norms. So, Dawkins provides no logical answer as to why he believes it's immoral to let a downs syndrome child live.

From Dawkin's atheist view, Dawkins assumes that there is no God. Since there is no God, all of humanity isn't created with any image in mind. Humankind came about through random chance purposes. As such, there is nothing to make humans any different to animals. Again, Dawkins leans on his evolutionary belief system.

So, lets consider some facts.

According to WebMD, the most common test for Downs Syndrome is highly inaccurate. If you want accuracy, there's a test that samples umbilical blood to run DNA tests to determine if your child has Down's. This test is 98% accurate. The problem is that it carries a risk of causing a miscarriage.

So, if you want to know for sure, you have to risk the life of your child. Otherwise, you can get an inconclusive test performed. At this point,there are no sure-fire ways to know if your child will have Down's without putting them at risk.

Are you really willing to risk the life of your child to know if they have Down's?

If you take Dawkins' stance to its logical end, what he's advocating for is elimination of those who are unfit. How do you determine who is fit? Do we start checking all children for defects? Do we start eliminating them because they're "going to suffer"? This goes back to eugenics and racial hygiene. Look these topics up for your self. You'll find all sorts of horrors that were committed in the early 1900's using evolution and the idea of the superior man.

But now consider how Dawkins' justifies his stance. He asserts that Down's Syndrome children suffer through life. Really? Do Down's Syndrome children really suffer?

Actor Chris Burke was best known for his role as Corky in the show "Live Goes On". Burke has Down's Syndrome. Burke makes millions a year and lives a very productive life as a Down's advocate. I don't see someone who's suffering. But, Burke is just one case.

The burden of proof falls on Dawkins to confirm that people with Down's are suffering. Dawkins must also explain how he defines suffering. What is suffering? Is Stephen Hawkins suffering? The guy's been bound to a chair for a large chunk of his life.

The Down's children that I've met have all led happy lives. They've had various challenges to overcome, but their lives were happy. Many were affectionate people. Often gentle. To say that these people do not deserve a choice to live life is a horrible thing to say.

God made all of mankind in His Image. This means that whether you have Down's, Autism, or any other handicap, you are still born in the image and likeness of God. Because you are born with the image and likeness of God, you deserve to live.

People with Down's Syndrome have difficulties, yes. They also have the right to life.

It's a shame that intelligent people can say things that are so insensitive and uneducated.