Richard Dawkins tweets on abortion: &...

Richard Dawkins tweets on abortion: ‘any fetus is less human than an adult pig’

There are 1829 comments on the freerepublic.com story from Mar 16, 2013, titled Richard Dawkins tweets on abortion: ‘any fetus is less human than an adult pig’. In it, freerepublic.com reports that:

It would seem the pro-life movement has acquired an unlikely supporter. On Wednesday, Richard Dawkins, a vocal proponent of atheism and the author of The God Delusion, posted a provocative tweet about abortion: With respect to those meanings of "human" that are relevant to the morality of abortion, any fetus is less human than an adult pig.

Join the discussion below, or Read more at freerepublic.com.

Largelanguage

Buckley, UK

#429 Apr 29, 2013
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't recall that phrase from anywhere in the Bible. Where did you find it?
I didn't mean literally. I meant the Bible mentions things along those lines. It mentions absolam sleeping with someone(I think it was incestful), and many others.
Largelanguage

Buckley, UK

#430 Apr 29, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Yahweh/Jesus ordered several rapes of non believers in the OT. Raping a believer costs you 50 shekels and you have to marry the girl so you can rape her over and over again.
Just what will 50 shekels get you? In other passages we see 30 shekels is enough to eat well on for 2 days.
So the guy has to pay the amount of day 3 days of meals for raping her. For him a great deal as now she has to cook clean and give him sex whenever he so demands or she can be punished by Jewish law!
Yahweh/Jesus is wacky like that.
<quoted text>
The issue was about laws regarding rape, it wasn't there to focus on rape itself.
Largelanguage

Buckley, UK

#431 Apr 29, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Smh
<quoted text>
By explicit I meant it was not implicit, it wasn't trying to imply some metaphor about washing with the blood of Christ.
Thinking

London, UK

#432 Apr 29, 2013
I don't know that they're always so discriminating as to the victim's belief system.
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>
They think it's okay to commit rape, murder, pedophilia, and slavery as long as they're not doing it to other christians.
Lincoln

United States

#433 Apr 29, 2013
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>
I didn't mean literally. I meant the Bible mentions things along those lines. It mentions absolam sleeping with someone(I think it was incestful), and many others.
funny atheists take the Bible literally,
like the fundamentalist Christians.

Ancient Greeks discussed and found atheism wanting.
Thinking

London, UK

#434 Apr 29, 2013
No, but you're saying the bible is not accurate.
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
funny atheists take the Bible literally,
like the fundamentalist Christians.
Lincoln

United States

#435 Apr 29, 2013
Thinking wrote:
No, but you're saying the bible is not accurate.
<quoted text>
Of course!

The Bible is translated
from a language without punctuation.

How could it be accurate?

Try reading "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" by Bart D.Ehrman.
spudgun

Stoke-on-trent, UK

#436 Apr 29, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
..reading "Misquoting Jesus: The Story Behind Who Changed the Bible and Why" by Bart D.Ehrman.
You realise that this book if true, is devastating to Christianity. As it proves that the Bible is not the word of God but the words of ordinary men like you or me. who just wrote down stories decades after the events were said to occur. No rational person can base their world view on such poor evidence.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#437 Apr 29, 2013
Yahweh/Jesus ordered the rapes of potentially millions of little girls in your holy book of myths.

50 shekels ( enough for nice food for 3 days ) to rape a young woman and you have to marry her. After marriage the girl gets to serve her rapist for the rest of her life getting repeatedly raped. What a loving god!

Your god also approves of slavery, even Paul orders a slave to return to his master.
Largelanguage wrote:
<quoted text>The issue was about laws regarding rape, it wasn't there to focus on rape itself.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#438 Apr 29, 2013
Ya he has no fckin idea what he's talking about and worse he changes his position 180 degrees so often you'd get dizzy. All he has is these desperate little pot shots hoping someone will respond.

A troll with absolutely nothing to say.
Thinking wrote:
<quoted text>No, but you're saying the bible is not accurate.
Lincoln

United States

#439 Apr 29, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
You realise that this book if true, is devastating to Christianity. As it proves that the Bible is not the word of God but the words of ordinary men like you or me. who just wrote down stories decades after the events were said to occur. No rational person can base their world view on such poor evidence.
or it means that faith in God is a bit more complex than fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist atheists realize.

He is making money from the book,
was on C-Span.
Peace

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#440 Apr 29, 2013
Bart is the apologetic friendly agnostic because he milks them for money. He has said before if there is a god it's not mentioned in any way shape or form in any holy book and is not a personal god. Basically nicely saying that being a believer is pointless.

I always question why he won't have a debate or even recorded conversation with Doctor Robert M. Price? Those two are friends but on matters of did Jesus exist and the historicity of the bible books Bart refuses to do so. Price would go circles around him and I guess that scares Erhman.

Wish Bart would man up one day though!
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>You realise that this book if true, is devastating to Christianity. As it proves that the Bible is not the word of God but the words of ordinary men like you or me. who just wrote down stories decades after the events were said to occur. No rational person can base their world view on such poor evidence.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#441 Apr 29, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
or it means that faith in God is a bit more complex than fundamentalist Christians and fundamentalist atheists realize.
He is making money from the book,
was on C-Span.
Peace
It's so complex you run in fear every time your asked to prove the god you're lying to us about.

Since: Jun 07

Location hidden

#442 Apr 29, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
Peace
You say Peace after comparing atheism to Stalinist genocide in the other thread. You're not fooling anyone you piece of sh*t theist troll with no morals.

“It's just a box of rain...”

Since: May 07

Knoxville, TN

#443 Apr 29, 2013
spudgun wrote:
<quoted text>
You realise that this book if true, is devastating to Christianity. As it proves that the Bible is not the word of God but the words of ordinary men like you or me. who just wrote down stories decades after the events were said to occur. No rational person can base their world view on such poor evidence.
You're right, and, in fact, Ehrman became an agnostic in the course of his advanced research, but not because of it. In a radio interview, he explained that he could reconcile the level of suffering throughout the world with the concept of a all-loving and all-powerful God. He's given some great talks on the provenance of scripture in general and the various books that make up the Bible in particular.

The earliest extant copies are exactly that--in fact, they are copies of copes of copies... this because documents could not be archived for significant periods of time. Media degraded quickly, and the only way to preserve documents was to hand copy them. But copyists made errors or "corrected" perceived errors with each iteration. Moreover, the only way to "publish" was, again, to copy each one by hand, so each of the early extant examples has a different "lineage," i.e., was handed down by a different series of copyists. The end result is that there are significant differences between the oldest known copies of each of the Bible's 66 books.

Check him out on youtube. He is both erudite and articulate--a real treat for the thinking listener.
Lincoln

United States

#444 Apr 29, 2013
Givemeliberty wrote:
Bart is the apologetic friendly agnostic because he milks them for money. He has said before if there is a god it's not mentioned in any way shape or form in any holy book and is not a personal god. Basically nicely saying that being a believer is pointless.
I always question why he won't have a debate or even recorded conversation with Doctor Robert M. Price? Those two are friends but on matters of did Jesus exist and the historicity of the bible books Bart refuses to do so. Price would go circles around him and I guess that scares Erhman.
Wish Bart would man up one day though!
<quoted text>
By "Wish Bart would man up ......."
could this include
agreeing with your
opinions? LOL

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#445 Apr 29, 2013
Bart's a smart guy who can illustrate how unreliable the bible books are and the ridiculous manner in which they were cobbled together.

That's why it puzzles me when he goes to prove Jesus existed he quotes Paul saying that Paul met Jesus' brother James so therefor Jesus must have at least existed! I'm like so the NT is very unreliable and should be looked at I. A poetic not historical sense..... Then Jesus existed because the bible says so?

Bart! Come on man you are smarter than that!

I really wish he would do a recorded interview if not a friendly debate with Doctor Price. The two are friends and respect each other as colleagues but when it comes to doing something like that he always turns Doctor Price down.

I hope one day Bart will man up because those two having a discussion on this would be fascinating!
NightSerf wrote:
<quoted text>You're right, and, in fact, Ehrman became an agnostic in the course of his advanced research, but not because of it. In a radio interview, he explained that he could reconcile the level of suffering throughout the world with the concept of a all-loving and all-powerful God. He's given some great talks on the provenance of scripture in general and the various books that make up the Bible in particular.

The earliest extant copies are exactly that--in fact, they are copies of copes of copies... this because documents could not be archived for significant periods of time. Media degraded quickly, and the only way to preserve documents was to hand copy them. But copyists made errors or "corrected" perceived errors with each iteration. Moreover, the only way to "publish" was, again, to copy each one by hand, so each of the early extant examples has a different "lineage," i.e., was handed down by a different series of copyists. The end result is that there are significant differences between the oldest known copies of each of the Bible's 66 books.

Check him out on youtube. He is both erudite and articulate--a real treat for the thinking listener.

“I Am No One Else”

Since: Apr 12

Seattle

#446 Apr 29, 2013
Lincoln wrote:
<quoted text>
funny atheists take the Bible literally,
like the fundamentalist Christians.
Ancient Greeks discussed and found atheism wanting.
So if the bible is not literal, then why do you consider it fact?

“Citizen_Patriot_ Voter_Atheist!”

Since: May 09

Earth,TX

#447 Apr 29, 2013
nanoanomaly wrote:
<quoted text>There is no amount of surgery that will, or can, change you from a man into a woman. Cosmetic surgery does not alter your genes.
But Jesus can teach you to be a male, but only so that you may gain entrance to heaven. Convincing him to teach you would be where the problem lies.

Since: Mar 11

Lexington, KY

#448 Apr 29, 2013
He just takes random pot shots hoping someone will respond. He obviously doesn't know much about ancient Greeks first as he sounds as if they were all united and in agreement on non believers.

Here's just a few famous ancient Greeks and what they had to say about their non belief.

http://atheism.about.com/od/atheismhistory/a/...

Not surprising the theists of the day had no answers for them either except violence and changing the subject when asked for proof.... Much like theists today!

The more things change....
KittenKoder wrote:
<quoted text>So if the bible is not literal, then why do you consider it fact?

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Atheism Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Atheism requires as much faith as religion? (Jul '09) 3 min Knowledge- 240,141
News Atheists Aren't the Problem, Christian Intolera... (Oct '14) 13 min woodtick57 7,697
News Phil Robertson talks against Atheists 48 min Insults Are Easier 142
Reason is the root of mental illness!!! 2 hr Amused 4
News "Science vs. Religion: What Scientists Really T... (Jan '12) 3 hr NoahLovesU 19,153
Science Disproves Evolution (Aug '12) 7 hr Thinking 2,248
The Ultimate Evidence of God (Mar '14) Tue Reason Personified 166
More from around the web