Abortion, evolution and use of the head

MICHAEL FUREY (Letters, February 25) seems to assume that anyone who disagrees with atheism does not “think with their heads”.

Let me put his head to work by asking where I can find the scientific evidence for:

1. The origin of life by chance?

2. The chance causality of the fine tuning of the universe?

3. The gradual changes proposed to explain the development of all life forms by macroevolution?

4.The huge difference between human persons and chimps though they share almost all their DNA.

Please, Mr Furey, don’t refer me to Dawkins. All he does is provide speculative scenarios with not a shred of the kind of evidence real science requires.

And real scientific evidence is what Mr Furey appears to have — if I read him correctly.

In one sense, the abortion debate (Letters, February 25) is independent of the God debate — the right to life is the most fundamental of human rights for people of all beliefs and none.

After all, if we came about by natural evolutionary forces and nothing else, then we are just clever animals with no reason — except, perhaps, expediency — to restrict what RE Silvera (Letters, February 25) calls “the most natural of human impulses”.

This, in my opinion, has led to certain other rights — the right to engage in sexual activity without consequences, the right to choose the death of one’s child — superseding the right to life. Funny, if I were an unborn child — and weren’t we all at one time — I would vote for the “medieval morality” and the “oppressive society” that RE Silvera so obviously detests. But, of course, I wouldn’t have a vote, would I?

Oliver Broderick

Montserrat House

Ashe Street

Youghal

Co Cork