Dawkins: Rape as wrong as having six fingers
- Justin Brierley: “But if we had evolved into a society in which rape was considered fine, would that mean that rape is fine?”
- Richard Dawkins: “I don’t want to answer that question…it’s enough for me to say that we live in a society where it’s not considered fine. We live in a society where selfishness, where failure to pay your debts, failure to reciprocate favors is regarded askance. Ah, that is the society in which we live. I’m very glad…that’s a value judgment, I’m very glad that I live in such a society.”
- Brierley: “It is …. But when you make a value judgment don’t you immediately step yourself outside of this evolutionary process and say … the reason this is good is because it’s good, and you don’t have any way to stand on that statement.”
- Dawkins: “But my value judgment itself could come from my evolutionary past.”
- Brierley: “So, therefore it’s just as random as any product of evolution.”
- Dawkins: “Well, you could say that…uh, but it doesn’t in any case…nothing about it makes it more probable that there is anything supernatural.”
- Brierley: “OK, but ultimately, your belief that rape is wrong is as arbitrary as the fact that we’ve evolved five fingers rather than six.”
- Dawkins: “You could say that, yes.”
Atheist Quote of the Day
“Let me summarize my views on what modern evolutionary biology tells us loud and clear … There are no gods, no purposes, no goal-directed forces of any kind. There is no life after death. When I die, I am absolutely certain that I am going to be dead. That’s the end for me. There is no ultimate foundation for ethics, no ultimate meaning to life, and no free will for humans, either.”
— William B. Provine
Why Atheistic Evolution is Self-Defeating
“It would be impossible to accept naturalism itself if we really and consistently believed naturalism. For naturalism is a system of thought. …if naturalism were true then all thoughts whatever would be wholly the result of irrational causes. Therefore, all thoughts would be equally worthless. Therefore, naturalism is worthless. If it is true, then we can know no truths. It cuts its own throat.
I remember once being shown a certain kind of knot which was such that if you added one extra complication to make assurance double sure you suddenly found that the whole thing had come undone in your hands and you had only a bit of string. It is like that with naturalism. It goes on claiming territory after territory: first the inorganic, then the lower organisms, then man’s body, then his emotions. But when it takes the final step and we attempt a naturalistic account of thought itself, suddenly the whole thing unravels.”
— C.S. Lewis
“A native speaker of English who has never read a word of the King James Bible is verging on the barbarian.”
— Richard Dawkins
Atheist Quote of the Day
“The fact that life evolved out of nearly nothing, some 10 billion years after the universe evolved out of literally nothing, is a fact so staggering that I would be mad to attempt words to do it justice.”
— Richard Dawkins
Arguing Against Evolution
This is just an overview of things TO and NOT to argue about when talking about evolution. The list alone will most likely not suffice for most, so click the titles for more in depth reasoning.
- If we descended from the apes, why are there still apes?
- If evolution is true, where are all the living links between us and the apes?
- If evolution is true, why are there homosexuals? They don’t reproduce, so natural selection should have eliminated them.
- The world was created 10,000 years ago, so there was no time for evolution to happen.
- The eye is too complex to have come about by chance.
- Evolution leads to immorality.
- Can’t you just see by looking that this world is designed?
- We know from Scripture that God created the world, including all of its life.
- Finally: Knowing what we’re talking about.
A worldview driven solely and slavishly by the discoveries of science will only find itself able to ‘describe’ the world, not explain it, not know it deeply, not understand it. It finds itself without basis or foundation for making moral jugdements or lending credence to lives which are saturated with significance, for a significance we mark every time we are hurt, fall in love, seek higher truth, or rail against injustice.