This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

Truth Seeker's Profile

Truth Seeker's Avatar Joined over 6 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by Truth Seeker

More Discussions by Truth Seeker

Latest Comments by Truth Seeker

Go to: The Comic Side of Evolution

Truth Seeker's Avatar Jump to comment 32 by Truth Seeker

Silly me :(

I apologize root2squared. I forgot to take off my satirical blinkers this morning.

That will teach me not to stay up all night reading 1984. It makes you kind of touchy when it comes to issues of Free Speech.

Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:38:00 UTC | #424766

Go to: The Comic Side of Evolution

Truth Seeker's Avatar Jump to comment 29 by Truth Seeker

root2squared wrote:

I strongly disagree with this article. It is offensive to me and I want it removed.


Why is the article offensive? If the article is really that bad, can't there at least be some explanation left in its place as to why?

It's rather irritating to have articles stripped off like this without some reasoning. "I am feeling offended" does not qualify as a strong reason in my book.

If the article is spouting nonsense, I'm sure people here are smart enough to expose it for what it is.

Please reinstate the article, or at least give us late arrivals an idea as to its source and content.

Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:10:00 UTC | #424763

Go to: Richard Dawkins on The Big Questions - 28th Dec 2008

Truth Seeker's Avatar Jump to comment 357 by Truth Seeker

166. Comment #311921 by Richard Dawkins on January 4, 2009 at 11:55 am


"But this sounds as though you (or the American feminists whom you are quoting) are prepared to take the truly horrible stance that a woman's rights are paramount EVEN IF the fetus suffers atrocious agony. This cannot be the position of any decent person. What the decent person should say is that the fetus, or at least the early embryo, has no capacity to suffer and THAT is why the woman's rights are paramount."


Richard,

I don't see how you can take that position for anything other than an early abortion. If you assert, as you do in The God Delusion, that a late term abortion can indeed cause suffering to the fetus (however minimal), how can you then hold to the principle of a fetus not suffering as being a preferential argument for pro-choice?

Although an embryo doesn’t suffer, that surely would not be the case for the duration of the pregnancy. As the child’s nervous system develops, the argument for lack of fetal suffering becomes increasingly precarious.

Regards

Mark

Mon, 05 Jan 2009 09:34:00 UTC | #297715

Go to: The Neanderthal Debate

Truth Seeker's Avatar Jump to comment 2 by Truth Seeker

>> 16 Apr 08: Neanderthal expert Dr Chris Stringer discusses new ideas of how neanderthals and early man co-existed with Telegraph Science Editor Dr Roger Highfield. <<

I have to strongly disagree with his premise.

Dr Roger Highfield probably did no co-exist with early man and neanderthals :-)

Sat, 03 May 2008 09:23:00 UTC | #165801

Go to: God vs. science: Can religion stand up to the test?

Truth Seeker's Avatar Jump to comment 16 by Truth Seeker

You always want proof (or backing it up for everything). Then please ... give me proof that that God does not exist (something I can witness to), and give me proof to how the universe was created (something I can witness to), since you know it all by science, you must be a creator, or one who denies the creator. The fear of the Lord is the beginning of Wisdom. I don't try to frighten anyone, it's all about what is clearly written in the scripture. It's all about whether you are living in the light or the darkness.

It is no virus, it is Life.

Mon, 06 Nov 2006 23:16:00 UTC | #7140

More Comments by Truth Seeker