"Sacred Abortion" I must admit that I absolutely dreaded reading the article Sacred Abortion. It was given to me over a half year before I wrote this and it sat on my computer circa three and a half years before I first...
In his article Discovery Channel Gunman James Jay Lee Was No Terrorist, psychiatrist Dr. Keith Ablow states of James Jay Lee—the man who took hostages and was untimately gunned down at the Discovery Channel building—“My guess is that James Lee had become hostage to a psychiatric disorder long before he took hostages.”
Well, when someone supports the subhuman, inhuman and inhumane brutal dismembering murder of beautiful, healthy, innocent and defenseless human babies you simply cannot expect them to base their view on anything even near the realm of logic (or ethics, for that matter).
The main argument of the pro-abortionist with whom Greg Koukl speaks is that unless you are personally doing something to help those babies after they are born then you have no right to be pro-life.
Considering the recent events pertaining to the murder of the abortionist George Tiller it seemed timely to revisit and repost this essay from True Freethinker's vaults which pertains to Richard Dawkins, abortion, terrorism, Christianity and radical Islam. In his book The God Delusion (read it for free here good for using the Ctrl+F function) Professor Richard Dawkins correlates Christians and Islamic terrorists with specific mentions of the Taliban, Osama bin Laden and the perpetrators of the London
During a brief respite from my critique of Rev. Dr. Mel White's assertions about homosexuality, Christianity and the Bible I posted the essay below, on abortion.
Interestingly, this past weekend I read an article that drew a wholly fallacious correlation between homosexuality and abortion. Thus, I thought to make mention of it before continuing on with Rev. Dr. Mel White.
Whenever Prof. Richard Dawkins, Dan Barker or, apparently, any of the New-Atheist Sect speaks on the issue of abortion and related topics they are sure to demonstrate both poor logic as well as virtual misanthropy (read Prof. Richard Dawkins' views here and his fallacious correlation between abortion and terrorism here.
What is under consideration in this essay is Dan Barker's view on human dignity. There is perhaps no better measure of someone's view of human dignity than is exampled in their views on the most innocent and defenseless human beings of which we can conceive. Let us deal with the unborn, the baby in the womb, which immediately brings us to the issue of abortion.
Richard Dawkins deals with the issue of abortion in a manner that is sadly indicative of the way in which he deals with every subject. He does not tackle the issue in and of itself but merely dispatches his straw man version of the issue. Rather than covering this sensitive and complicated issue he narrowly concocts his own particular, and peculiar, definitions and then discredits what are merely his own caricatures. In fact, he does not define what an abortion is-what it means to "get an abortion" and what the various procedures actually are.
This essay consists of the Professor Richard Dawkins portions of a more encompassing essay entitled Look Both Ways Two Atheistic Logical Fallacies. The point of the original essay is that it is very common to find atheists committing twin logical fallacies that we have termed: the fallacy of validation by projection and the fallacy of validation by regression. In order to validate their beliefs atheist look both ways, up and down, the corridors of time-to the inaccessible past and future.
Professor Dawkins appears to be so enamored with the document hypothesis that he commits a fallacy: the argument from personal incredulity. In other words if I find something hard to believe then it must not have happened. In this case, Prof. Richard Dawkins appears to find it hard to believe that two similar events could have occurred in the history of the world, or in the history of a nation, or in an individual's life.
Having made reference to Genesis 19 Prof. Richard Dawkins makes that following comment in referring to Judges 19: