Brilliant counter-argument by the way. The reason why Richard Dawkins had a stroke. Everything hinges on that.Arising_uk wrote:What 'campaign' to destroy him? So far all I've seen from goggle is the twatterati, wastebookers and blaggers responding to something he decided to say in the social idiot sphere on someone else's blag. These people are no less individuals than the religious nuts you imply are harmless to him and the liberal left are always falling out. That an institution decided to cancel a talk is the fault of the institution for being weak but I note that when he had his stroke he'd just received news that they'd reinstated the talk and apologised to him.But all this is pretty much immaterial to my point and that is that you are talking bollocks about his heart-condition and the PC being responsible not least because it's the fourth biggest killer over here so it's pretty usual that 65 year-old men have strokes.vegetariantaxidermy wrote:Of course I'm aware that he's received abuse from religious individuals who can't stand him. That would be something he would expect to happen. What he didn't expect was a determined campaign to destroy him from those who claim to be liberal and supposedly value the same things he does. ...If you're going to write discontinuous sentences how should I respond?I'm not going over the same thing for the umpteenth time. Arguing about it is pointless, and I skip over your sliced-up responses anyway. They are unnecessarily irksome.
You obviously don't have a clue what went on. It was hardly just a few individuals on Twitter. It was an organised campaign of harassment. It's worked too. There are a lot of people out there with no real opinions of their own who just believe whoever is shouting the loudest at any given time (and the PC are really good at shouting).
Take his comments about Down's Syndrome. Nearly all, if not all, women who discover they are having a Down's Syndrome baby have an abortion. Statistically that must include a lot of supposedly anti-abortion religiotards. The worst that could be said about Dawkins' comment on the subject is that he didn't need to say it, since women are doing that anyway, but it was said on being asked for advice from a woman who thought she might be carrying a Down's Syndrome. If she didn't want his opinion then why ask?
It was all about the PC finding yet another group that they could get 'offended' on behalf of.