Richard Dawkins is a moral disaster

Take noted biologist/atheist/author Richard Dawkins, who, like your run-of-the-mill creationist, confuses the role of science and moral doctrine.

Dawkins recently tweeted out a link to a New Republic piece by biologist Jerry A. Coyne, where the latter bemoans horrific instances of the Irish government trying to save babies from late-term abortions on demand. Obviously, some of the stories in Coyne’s piece are complicated. In some, the mothers lives may have been in danger, and in others, they clearly were not. But the very idea that any abortion restriction exists prompts Coyne to offer readers some preposterous imaginary. For example: “This whole scenario conjures up images of the Catholic Inquisition: women tied to boards and tortured.”

Dawkins approves, of course. In a civilized world – a world where biologists determine when human life not only begins but is worth caring about – we can make mincemeat out of 20-week-old fetuses without much compunction. And in Dawkins’ estimation, civility means we extend the right to discard life merely because it makes us uncomfortable.