Richard Dawkins to Mother of Down Syndrome Kid: “Abort it”

I’ll eat your fetus with some fava beans and a nice Chianti. fth-fth-fth-fth, slurp.

The infamous Evolutionist Richard Dawkins used Twitter to tell a mother to abort her Down Syndrome fetus. Of course Dawkins would say abort the child. I reckon he feels they wouldn’t grasp his evolutionary theories. Only people who embrace evolution are worth living. Everyone else who doesn’t embrace it is a waste of space. Hear more in this Zonation!

Thanks for watching my vids! If you like the message in them then You’ll have a BLAST nukin’ the liberal Narrative with my audio book of Christian Conservalicious profundus, written and read by Me! WEAPON OF A.S.S. DESTRUCTION! CLICK HERE OR IMAGE AND CHECK OUT SOME REVIEWS, AND GET YOUR COPY!!!


  • John H. Melton

    Smacks of Eugenics and Margaret Sanger-‘Sanger was a proponent of negative eugenics, which aims to improve human hereditary traits through social intervention by reducing the reproduction of those who were considered unfit.’… Downs Syndrome fits into that belief system…

    • bdaniel230

      This is why people like Dawkins, Wendy Davis, Sheila Jackson Lee, Eleanor Norton-Holmes and all of the other Liberals, need to have the state support Planned Parenthood. How can they promulgate the ideals of Margaret Sanger unless the government supports it? I mean aborting a human must be done at the expense of the state, how can someone with no intelligence afford an abortion? I think that the Obamunist is a prime example of a failed late term abortion.

  • bondroid

    I agree. He shouldn’t have been aborted… but he should have been slapped around a little. : )

  • Edwin Hutchins

    Never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level. And beat you with experience.

    • Zo

      Righto, Edwin. “Do not give dogs what is sacred; do not throw your pearls to pigs. If you do, they may trample them under their feet, and turn and tear you to pieces. -Matt 7:6

    • Al Johnson

      Jesus said you must kill your disobedient children……Mark 7:9-13

      Yea, we know how to copy and paste scripture as well

    • Edwin Hutchins

      Wow Dude, that is totally taken out of context, Jesus was explaining in that verse the hypocrisy of the laws of the pharisees. Not telling Christians to do it. Yea you can copy and paste scripture, now seek to understand it, instead of twist it for your own purpose..

    • Al Johnson

      Well, if you have actually read the Bible cover to cover as I have done you would see the absurdities in it.

      She lusted after her lovers, whose genitals were like those of donkeys and whose emission was like that of horses. Ezekiel 23:20 NIV

      Do not wear clothing woven of two kinds of material. Leviticus 19:19

      Thou shalt not boil a kid in its mother’s milk. Exodus 23:19

      There are virtually hundreds more nonsensical verses
      It works out well if you cherry pick but if you believe the whole book is the word of God, you have a lot of explaining to do …

    • Shawn Morris

      Some of these demands would seem weird by today’s interpretation simple because you are not reading it with in the context of the time, the Old Testament even more so. The Old testament is a collection of rules, parables, hymns, and words of prophets of the time. For example in reading Exekiel 23:20 in full context he was describing just how morally deprived these two women had become. Amd in Leviticus 19:19 which you left out part of was one of several rules put in place to separate the Israelites’ from the Canaanites and their religious practices of the time. Some of these rules where for the health of safety of the Israelite as well. Exodus 23:19 was about separating Meat from Milk. Keeping one from spoiling the other. But you would have to understand what life was like at the time, and also take into consideration who these rules where meant for.

    • Al Johnson

      Wow, I have told by priests and nuns that God’s word is eternal and now you tell me … well, it changes over time. So confused. Maybe you should have an authority to translate “What it really means”
      OH, you do, The Church… Oh but the Bible is soooo clear that after 2000 years you have over 30 thousand different sects
      But WHO has the “correct” interpretation ?
      Your odds are 30,000 to 1 …

    • Shawn Morris

      Never said it changes over time you did. I said that it still means what it meant back then. I think you are just an angry soul who will distort and change anything i say or anyone else says. Also in context you would know that those laws that we discussed where written by the Rabbis of the time, God’s Laws are still relevant today which are the 10 commandments.

    • Al Johnson

      Ah, ” The Ten Commandments”
      Let’s see, the first 3 are all about Me , Me , Me. GOD
      The next 5 are common sense and existed LONG before The Ten Commandments and the last 2 are ” Thought Crime”
      Really, thought crime, you can be condemned for thinking about your neighbors wife or car…
      The ONLY commandment that should matter to us is the ” Golden Rule” Do unto others as you would have them do unto you ” It works 100 % of the time … I am a good person and I follow that… No invisible magic man in the sky needed …

    • Shawn Morris

      No one ask you to believe, or ask you if you thought the laws are relevant. Funny you claim that the Golden rule matters or should matter but then you turn around and insult my thoughts and beliefs. I didnt insult your thoughts I simple explained the facts.

    • Al Johnson

      You explained ZERO FACTS. All your conversation is based on Christian faith …
      Just trying to show you how silly those Ten Commandments are …

    • Kate

      So do you just come here to troll Christians? How sad is your life?

    • Al Johnson

      I come here to try to get Christians to actually THINK…
      Plus, It entertains me…
      What’s your excuse ?

    • Shawn Morris

      He has to effect me in a negative way to be trolling, in the end he is just showing himself. And my Facts sir lay in proving that you took the lines of scripture out of context. I can no more prove to a non-believer that God exist than you can prove he doesnt. The difference between me and you is that i believe in the choice to believe or not to believe. Where as you are determined to take away the choice to believe simply because you do not. Sounds like you are the one with something to prove as you have a need to force people to believe as you do, I do not.

    • Al Johnson

      Because in the name of whoevers GOD one claims… Theists… Burn people at the stake because they think they are witches, yes, Christians are doing this in modern day Africa …

      Blow themselves up in crowded market places killing women and children and whoever gets in their way, All in the name of their GOD…

      Fly planes into buildings… All in the name of their GOD…

      Perform female circumcision… All in the name of their GOD.

      I suspect you see where I am going here, the list goes on and on and on …

      When you STOP committing all these atrocities in the name of God, I will go away quietly and not care what you do …

    • Shawn Morris

      Modern day Christian are not burning people at the stake or what have you. These are examples of extremist, and all Ideologies have extremist. Even Atheists have their extremist who believe they should wipe the planet of anyone who believes in a Deity simple because they dont. Look here this very article is an example of an extreme Evolutionist. People die in the name of money every day, do you hate on bankers? Keep making excuses for your bigotry.

    • Al Johnson

      FIRST … You tube “Christians burning at the stake” Maybe your eyes will deceive you …
      SECOND … These are NOT extremists. They follow their holy books ” TO The Letter” After all, WHO should be the one to choose WHICH verses are the ones to follow and which ones do we ignore, so they just follow ALL of them …
      THIRD… NOT fond of bankers…
      Bigotry… Are you serious Bigotry… I thought theists had a monopoly on Bigotry. We think EVERYONE should be treated EQUAL. You think gays and blacks and Jews are the ones you need to take the nation back from …

    • Reba

      Some of the food requirements in the Old Testament were ritualistic. Meat representing death and milk representing life in the Jewish faith. It was to remind them that life is sacred. Not eating pork or the blood of an animal was for health reasons. These rules were developed while wandering around on the desert for forty years. They were to protect the people from illness that eating rare meats of the wrong variety would cause because cooking it fully might not be possible. If you really studied the bible and check into different religious beliefs you would know some of this stuff. Try studying harder. Lots of books out there to be had on the subject. And praying for understanding doesn’t hurt either.

    • Al Johnson

      Of course I understand all the food issues. Sometimes I like to be mean spirited and make people think and explain …

      As far as “Lots of books out there” Why would HE make it so difficult to understand if HE really wanted us to ” Believe”…After 2000 years you would have thought it would be universally accepted but, No, it has over 30,000 different sects …

      As far as Moses, here he is speaking …

      “You must kill them all – every man, woman, and child – except the young virgin girls. Keep the virgins for yourselves.” – Numbers 31:15-41

      Obviously one of the “old” rules that don’t apply anymore. Speaking of old rules that don’t apply anymore… How about homosexuality? Isn’t that one of the “Old” rules? Jesus never mentioned it …And don’t get me started on The Ten Commandments …

    • Edwin Hutchins

      Again you choose to take every verse out of context.

      Exodus 23:19 talks about the First of fruits, and the boiling of a young goat[kid] in its mothers milk was an Egyptian ritual and thus forbidden. As they were seen as Idolaters

      You are cherry picking your own self. BY only choosing scripture to fit your point.

      Try this Proverbs 3:5

      Trust in the lord with all your heart and lean not on your own understanding; In all ways submit to him and he will make your paths straight.

      There are nonsensical verses to you, because you lean on your own understanding

      The Ezekiel passage was part of a specific judgement handed down to two sisters that were prostitutes and a symbolic representation of how far the people had fallen for excess.

      Leviticus 19:19
      You shall keep my statutes. You shall not let your cattle breed with a different kind. You shall not sow your field with two kinds of seed, nor shall you wear a garment of cloth made of two kinds of material.

      Again out of context These and other prohibitions were designed to forbid the Israelites to engage in fertility cult practices of the Canaanites. The Canaanites believed in sympathetic magic, the idea that symbolic actions can influence the gods and nature…. Mixing animal breeds, seeds, or materials was thought to “marry” them” so as magically to produce “offspring,” that is, agricultural bounty in the future

      For Somebody that has read the Bible cover to cover, your knowledge of verses you can use to discredit it is amazing. Though you choose to leave out the verses that do not fit your view. I am surprised that you read ‘nonsensical’ verses and then left it at that instead of trying to understand what they mean, you mock.

      I do not have any explaining to do, but someday you will

    • Al Johnson

      If HE really wanted us to believe , why did he make it so complicated. Why a cat and mouse game of ” Oh, that’s not what it means, it means THIS”. If he meant THIS, the why didn’t he SAY THIS.
      The Bible has a lot of good parts in it , so why is it inundated with such B.S.

    • Edwin Hutchins

      I cannot answer for God.
      Please reread Proverbs 3:5 that is the best way I know how to answer your “why”

      It appears that if you do not understand why a passage is there or what it means.You tout it as fallacy.

      Anytime I find a passage in the bible I find odd, or difficult to understand. I research it, ask questions about it to my pastor and I keep digging until I feel satisfied. I dont just go “oh that makes no sense at all , must be BS because the answer is not obvious to me” and then leave it at that.

      The Bible is not meant to be fully understood at first glance. Seeking out the answers to the questions you have ultimately brings you closer to God.

      After I explained those versus the best I could with the limited understanding of them I have, they are still BS to you ? Then why leave it at that and not dig into it ? Someone so ready to dismiss the bible as you should want more ammunition to fire, surely knowing more about why you don’t ‘boil a young goat in its mothers milk ,’ would only serve to further your argument.

      A Ryrie study bible would be a great gun in your arsenal to prove your point. You could beat God with his own words, and not your understanding of those words.

      I hope you find your peace. God Bless and have a nice day and safe weekend

    • Al Johnson

      Maybe it’ me, I have read the Bible cover to cover twice, once at a young age and again 4 or 5 years ago. I have spent untold hours in Bible Studies classes but it is filled with so many contradictions and so much fluff. I have also spent a great deal of time reading about where the Bible came from and what gospels were left out. It is a marvelous book of literature. It has many good parts but there are many things in it that we know are not true and if it supposed to be the infallible “Word of God ” it should have NO contradictions and EVERYTHING should be correct…
      But, again, maybe it’s just logic and reasoning getting in my way …

    • Pax Humana

      …or we can argue with said idiot and beat them if they choose to get violent and thus rid ourselves of another violent savage from this planet.

  • Ron Smorynski

    Dawkins makes a great Canaanite! He leads us to his creature worship and child sacrifices.

    • Zo

      Sho nuff, Ron! You’d think he’d like the Bible. It speaks so much about ’em. 😉

  • theescotsman

    How about a “Retro-Active” Abortion? We can start with Richard Dawkins being The First !

  • 05Stang

    What helps people like Dawkins spiral further down into the rabbit hole is the diversionary narrative. The narrative is always about a “choice” and YOU trying to take it away. It’s never about the choice of the unborn child to live and never about ending a life regardless of what current stage that LIFE is at. (Science, you know that other “God”, verifies that even the most basic organisms contain within a will to survive.) Change the subject to a murderer on death row and suddenly life becomes sacred.. Welcome to the rabbit hole.

  • GoneFishing

    @disqus_vGf9wk9tIg:disqus, some of the self-professed “smartest” among us are actually brain dead.

  • Sherry Jones

    I happen to be an evolutionist, rather than a creationist, and I think Dawkins statement was egregiously immoral. He’s ignoring the fact that it was our evolution that allowed us the ability to care for children who have down syndrome, or other birth defects.

    • Just Me

      Well said

  • Sunshine Kid

    Liberals tend to be criminals. Killing, to them, seems to come naturally. They advocate it, as well as advocate “humanity” to criminal behavior, i.e., do not favor the death penalty for killers, use every judicial procedure to “technically” dismiss criminal cases instead of prosecuting criminal behavior, etc.

  • Reverend Draco

    Well. . . here’s the thing – the increase in defective humans causes a snowballing of. . . defective humans.

    It used to be that such obviously defective people were “exposed” as babies – taken out into the wilderness and left to perish – assuring that only strong genes were allowed to flourish. Even dogs are smart enough to understand this idea – hence, why they eat defective pups.

    Allowing these defective humans to live is indefensible.
    It’s not fair to them – quality of life is just as important, if not more important, than quantity – it’s not fair to the rest of us who are generally on the hook to pay for the support of these defects, and who have to deal with the results of their votes as they get older.

    On the plus, these defective humans are just another bit of proof that there is no “god.” If there were a god, who (according to the bibble) loves children so much that when an infant dies they go straight to heaven – due to being totally innocent (so much for “original sin). . . all babies would be born perfect and healthy. That they aren’t means either A) there is no god; or B) he is irredeemably evil.

    • TOPOV

      Draco, you should look up the word “evolution”.
      The “snowballing of defective humans” can only happen when the so-called “defectives” pro-create with non-“defectives”.
      If we were to eliminate all of the “defective” people from the start, where would science and medicine be now? Illness makes mankind seek betterment. Our knowledge, compassion and spirituality is what separates us from animals.
      Who are you to decide one’s quality of life? And, how is it you are paying for “these defects”? You, sure as hell, are not perfect and neither am I. No-one is.
      The belief in God is one’s faith. If you choose to have no faith, that is your choice. To mock and ridicule another’s faith is pure evil. Some would say science is God inspired, others wouldn’t—a personal view. Your words show your complete ignorance and how you can’t comprehend compassion, tolerance, medicine, humanity and faith.

    • Jon Snow

      This guy…

    • thomas

      Reverend Draco, Religious ramblings aside; so, if it could be detected that a fetus/child was to be born with any abnormality, you would agree with “disposing of them”? With that, are you suggesting that if we could detect the sexual orientation(for abnormalities) of a fetus/child prior to birth, they should be “disposed of”?

    • del2124

      Men with Downs syndrome can’t reproduce, however. They’re sterile.

  • livefreeordiehard

    Anyone saying such a thing about a Downs syndrome child has never been around these wonderfully sweet people. Before I married, I told my (ex-)husband-to-be that I wanted to adopt Down syndrome children. Mr. Liberal was all for it – until it came time to do it. Then it was “I never promised you a family”. Yeah, EX. He later left me for his girlfriend after I had broken both of my arms. Gee, ain’t liberals great stand up people?

STAY IN THE LOOP
Don't miss a thing. Sign up for our email newsletter to get the lastest from Alfonzo Rachel!