Or is it possible that the theophobe has human feelings, just suppresses them?
Budding atheists wondering whether Richard Dawkins is in need of a little time away from Twitter to reflect on the past few weeks are about to have their (lack of) prayers answered. The philosopher has managed ... to voice his opinions on what it would be ethical for a mother who is informed that her unborn child has Down Syndrome to do....
after engaging in conversation with a number of users, his ethical values appeared to come a little unstuck. “994 human beings with Down's Syndrome deliberately killed before birth in England and Wales in 2012. Is that civilised?” @AidanMcCourt asked. “Yes, it is very civilised. These are fetuses, diagnosed before they have human feelings,” Dawkins responded. ...
“Abort it and try again. It would be immoral to bring it into the world if you have the choice,” he tweeted back.
And what, you may ask, was his earlier contretemps? ("contwittertemps"?)
Looking on the bright side of date rape and paedophilia.
(Kind of like Whoopi Goldberg's "I know it wasn't rape-rape. I think it was something else, but I don't believe it was rape-rape," apologia for Roman Polanski?)
Seriously though, the fact that this man's thoughts are accorded respect or given any notice at all outside of Twitter and the like is appalling.