Is Richard Dawkins calling for genocide?

Stephen Hawking should have been killed in the womb.
 
Stephen Hawking should have been killed in the womb.

Hawkins was over 20 years old before his (extremely rare) disease started to gradually paralyse him. For most people it occurs after 60 years of age.

He was just unlucky, not genetically "defected". If he had been paralysed from birth, then he probably wouldn't have been Stephen Hawking, but would've lived a much more miserable existence. The reason why he was able to excel, is because he was a fully educated, physically adult man by the time the degenerative disease took hold.

The success stories among people who were fucked from birth, are much more scarce.
 
I don't really have a problem with either argument.

I think it's up to the people involved and it's a hard hard decision between a doctor and a patient.

There are some serious things where the child would just be doomed and the parents will get to ride through caretaking hell with them. The kind of stuff where there is 50% chance they'll be dead by 2 and a 95% chance they'll be dead by 4.

And there are also cases where repeated surgeries and a shitload of treatment got somebody to high functioning adulthood.





I will say this, I knew a professor in college who was a brilliant man. One of the stars of the department. He and his wife were only able to conceive once, and their child is physically healthy but mentally limited. Severe problems with his brain since birth but he now walks and can complete simple tasks as an adult. He'll never be high functioning and probably won't live long past 50. They have no grandchildren and don't expect to.

He wanted to teach his son everything he knows. And he can't. His dna, his family lineage, they're dying there. And he loves his son, has been with him through thick and thin.

But he wears all black once a year even while teaching, as if he's mourning.

So one day I asked him, why the black on that day?

"It's my son's birthday."
 
Hawkins was over 20 years old before his (extremely rare) disease started to gradually paralyse him. For most people it occurs after 60 years of age.

He was just unlucky, not genetically "defected". If he had been paralysed from birth, then he probably wouldn't have been Stephen Hawking, but would've lived a much more miserable existence. The reason why he was able to excel, is because he was a fully educated, physically adult man by the time the degenerative disease took hold.

The success stories among people who were fucked from birth, are much more scarce.

Unlucky? Is that a scientific or medical term? Anyone with a serious defect is unlucky.

His body was a cage. He was defective . How many people are worth killing to sacrifice one Stephen Hawking? Give me a number. Cuz I say one great man is worth more than a million regular men.


quote-to-me-one-man-is-worth-ten-thousand-if-he-is-outstanding-heraclitus-321403.jpg
 
Last edited:
Unlucky? Is that a scientific or medical term? Anyone with a serious defect is unlucky.

His body was a cage. He was defective .

Point being that in most people the disease occurs at 50-60 years of age. Hawking was an extremely rare exception, in that his physical degeneration started in his 20's. But even then, he had lived to be a full adult before being incapacitated.

We're talking about people being incapacitated at birth, not when they are adults. In most scenarios, Hawking would've lived a good 50-60 years before the disease took hold.

Obviously there's no reason to abort someone who has got a very high chance of living to retirement age before encountering any problems.
 
Last edited:
"Hitler and Mengela were just ahead of their time."

-Richard Dawkins
 
Looks like the pope does not read the dictionary. Unless he just wants to change the meaning of Abortion but there is a reason why the term exists.
 
Point being that in most people the disease occurs at 50-60 years of age. Hawking was an extremely rare exception, in that his physical degeneration started in his 20's. But even then, he had lived to be a full adult before being incapacitated.

We're talking about people being incapacitated at birth, not when they are adults. In most scenarios, Hawking would've lived a good 50-60 years before the disease took hold.

Obviously there's no reason to abort someone who has got a very high chance of living to retirement age before encountering any problems.

Stephen Hawking was suffering while he did great work. From his wheelchair.

Let's properly scale this. About production and suffering. Let us use the living. You should all be killed because you are massively defective compared to Bill Gates. You may as well be retarded compared to him. You aren't even of the same species. Why should people like you be allowed to live? You are a drain who have brought nothing great to this world. Not made a single dent in it. You have no reason to exist. You are superfluous.
 
How many people are worth killing to sacrifice one Stephen Hawking? Give me a number. Cuz I say one great man is worth more than a million regular men.


quote-to-me-one-man-is-worth-ten-thousand-if-he-is-outstanding-heraclitus-321403.jpg

Nobody would've aborted Hawking. He was born without any physical defects and had the same chance of surviving to old age without crippling afflictions, as any other human being.

He caught a rare neuro-disease in his 20's, which occurs in about 1/1,000,000 cases, which crippled him. But by that time, he was already a fully educated Oxford professor.
 
Stephen Hawking was suffering while he did great work. From his wheelchair.

Let's properly scale this. About production and suffering. Let us use the living. You should all be killed because you are massively defective compared to Bill Gates. You may as well be retarded compared to him. You aren't even of the same species. Why should people like you be allowed to live? You are a drain who have brought nothing great to this world. Not made a single dent in it. You have no reason to exist. You are superfluous.

How are we all massively defective compared to Bill Gates? Because he has more money?

Contrary to what you might think, he's no more intelligent that most men. In fact, he was probably a more rudimentary programmer than what I am. The programs he developed were laughable in modern terms. But where he separated himself from others, was as a businessman who seized opportunities and stole other people's ideas.

Nothing separates me, or most people in the War Room, from Bill Gates. He was born only a man, like the rest of us. We do not have crippling afflictions that prevent us from enjoying daily life and from exploring possibilities. Some make better choices than others, but they still have those choices to make.

If Hawking had been born crippled from birth, he would not have been anything. He probably would not have lived a year. Bringing him up in this case is meaningless because he was never born with a serious, crippling defect.
 
How are we all massively defective compared to Bill Gates? Because he has more money?

Contrary to what you might think, he's no more intelligent that most men. In fact, he was probably a more rudimentary programmer than what I am. The programs he developed were laughable in modern terms. But where he separated himself from others, was as a businessman who seized opportunities and stole other people's ideas.

Nothing separates me, or most people in the War Room, from Bill Gates. He was born only a man, like the rest of us. We do not have crippling afflictions that prevent us from enjoying daily life and from exploring possibilities. Some make better choices than others, but they still have those choices to make.

If Hawking had been born crippled from birth, he would not have been anything. He probably would not have lived a year. Bringing him up in this case is meaningless because he was never born with a serious, crippling defect.

Oh god, you are trying to rationalize how Bill Gates is not better than you. We are done here. People like Bill Gates move the world and will be remembered. You are a fart in the wind.
 
Oh god, you are trying to rationalize how Bill Gates is not better than you. We are done here.

He is not. By your American standards, sure. He sure possesses more capital. But based on my own standards, all he is doing is leaving a bigger pile of shit behind himself, than I ever will. So on those terms, I do not really rate him above me. I do not live my life idolizing other men. Maybe you do.

Anyway, your argument was lost from the beginning so it's probably best we are done.
 
He is not. By your American standards, sure. He sure possesses more capital. But based on my own standards, all he is doing is leaving a bigger pile of shit behind himself, than I ever will. So on those terms, I do not really rate him above me.

Your standards are meaningless. lol at American standards. by world standards. Him and Steve Jobs are loved from here to China. I also love how people nitpick the technical skills of the two greatest tech guys of our generation. lol. Never gets old. They are just mediocre guys who got lucky and ripped people off. That is why you will never be them. With that shit attitude.

People with downs syndrome are men too. Just like you. Derp. subjective standards all the way down.
 
Your standards are meaningless. lol at American standards. by world standards. Him and Steve Jobs are loved from here to China. I also love how people nitpick the technical skills of the two greatest tech guys of our generation. lol. Never gets old. They are just mediocre guys who got lucky and ripped people off. That is why you will never be them. With that shit attitude.

I do not give a damn about the world, nor how many people from China love them.

I do not aspire to be them. I've made it quite clear that I despise the turn that the world is taking, at the hands of the men that you seem to be infatuated with. Why should I put a man on a pedestal, when I despise the results of his work?

And yes, their technical skills were rudimentary at best.
 
I do not aspire to be them. I've made it quite clear that I despise the turn that the world is taking, at the hands of the men that you seem to be infatuated with. Why should I put a man on a pedestal, when I despise the results of his work?

And yes, their technical skills were rudimentary at best.

That's good. Because they control the world and you don't. Your kind is not needed.

Why should I put an average fuck like you on a pedestal over a retard? You are just varying degrees of small.
 
So when a test can detect such disease parents may abort not knowing it would take 20, 40 or 60 years to develop. But I guess the "success" stories are scarse so no harm done.


Hawkins was over 20 years old before his (extremely rare) disease started to gradually paralyse him. For most people it occurs after 60 years of age.

He was just unlucky, not genetically "defected". If he had been paralysed from birth, then he probably wouldn't have been Stephen Hawking, but would've lived a much more miserable existence. The reason why he was able to excel, is because he was a fully educated, physically adult man by the time the degenerative disease took hold.

The success stories among people who were fucked from birth, are much more scarce.
 
Contrary to what you might think, he's no more intelligent that most men. In fact, he was probably a more rudimentary programmer than what I am. The programs he developed were laughable in modern terms. But where he separated himself from others, was as a businessman who seized opportunities and stole other people's ideas.

ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

<DCWhoa>
 
That's good. Because they control the world and you don't. Your kind is not needed.

Why should I put an average fuck like you on pedestal over a retard? You are just differing degrees of small.

They do not control anything. Jobs is dead, and Gates is hardly what I would call a political player. Most crook third world strong-men who control an entire country's resources, probably have more money stashed, than he does.

I never claimed that you need to put me on a pedestal. No man should be. We are all differing degrees of small, or big, depending on how you prefer to look at it.

What we are speaking about, are the situations where even the smallest and the most meager possibilities are not available to us, and when all that remains is the possibility of suffering and a painful end.
 
They do not control anything. Jobs is dead, and Gates is hardly what I would call a political player. Most crook third world strong-men who control an entire country's resources, probably have more money stashed, than he does.

I never claimed that you need to put me on a pedestal. No man should be. We are all differing degrees of small, or big, depending on how you prefer to look at it.

What we are speaking about, are the situations where even the smallest and the most meager possibilities are not available to us, and when all that remains is the possibility of suffering and a painful end.

lol at Gates not being a "political player" in the world. He has no influence or reach at all. He affects nothing. You have to tear down great men to your level. It is pathetic. Done with you for real this time.
 
Back
Top