According to his favorite evolution theory, that is like saying: „It is immoral not to abort a pregnancy when we know that the child will be like Richard Dawkins.“
Richard Dawkins is a godwannabe.
Arminius, you make Dawkins’ point when you use having Down’s syndrome as an insult. That’s a tacit agreement with Dawkins, because it implies that having Down’s is a bad thing, and moreover that everyone agrees it’s a bad thing. That, if true, would be a point in Dawnkins’ favor.
It’s also a textbook ad hominem fallacy.
I don’t Think that’s a good read of his post. First, if he is critisizing and kind of human, it would be the godwanna be human, not the Down’s syndrome human. Second he is showing the consequences of Dawkin’s argument. It was not that Dawkin’s is wrong because he is a godwanna be, but rather Dawkin’s position entails a problem for Dawkin’s own existence. His existence is a necessary condition for any argument his kind of mind would make.
How well is that going for you now? Won’t the people who are already doing that have a tremendous advantage over people like you who 1) start with nothing, while many of them will hit the ground running, having caches, training, weopons, facilities, etc. Not all of those who might hit the ground running will survive the first stages of a collapse, but those who do will have far more Resources, interpersonal training, Connections to other survivors, military training than someone who is sleeping on couches pre-collapse. Further, you have no idea if what you said above is true. It seems easy in your mind, but you have very Little experience with it.
Just a bunch of Words.
That’s irrelevent. I was presuming for the sake of argument that collapse is coming. Again, it seems to me you have training, given what you have reported about your Life, for a marginal, post-collapse type scavenging role. And this likely does put you way ahead of, for example, most of the middle class who has not invested in training and preparation for collapse. But compared to Groups you had damn well better stay off the radar of, you are, so far, a very weakly prepared and near zero resourced player. This doesn’t mean that you won’t do well, but your certainty is a sign that you simply do not get it, have poor threat and self-assessment skills and will not do well, even with the advantages you have over Joe Shmoe who Thinks society will go on forever.
That is probably the more charitable reading. I read his “That’s like saying” to be “[Saying fetuses with Down’s should be aborted] is [the equivalent] of saying”, and so [fetuses with Down’s] to be equivalent to “the child will be like Richard Dawkins”.
If the argument is moreso that one could use Dawkins’ argument to abort any class, including the class of ‘kids who will be like Dawkins’, I agree that the argument is not fallacious or self-undermining, and, Arminius, my apologies if I’ve misunderstood your point.
Emmm… no.
Arminius said “According to Dawkins’ favorite theory…”. He was saying that Dawkins was suggesting to abort disabled fetuses and thus should have been aborted himself.
Yes, of course.
Thanks, Moreno and James.
Okay, Carleas; although at first I though I would have to permaban you, but then I thought: “No, that would be too Darwinistic or even too Dawkinsistic”. 
Have a nice day.