Celebrity New Atheist, Richard Dawkins has had quite a bit to say about Islam’s god Allah, for example:
“The God of the Qur’an is arguably the most unpleasant character in all fiction: jealous and proud of it; a petty, unjust, unforgiving control-freak; a vindictive, bloodthirsty ethnic cleanser; a misogynistic, homophobic, racist, infanticidal, genocidal, filicidal, pestilential, megalomaniacal, sadomasochistic, capriciously malevolent bully.”
Just kidding, just like his comrades; he is a coward and would not dare say any such thing. Rather, he wrote this about YHVH, the God of the Bible. This is because the Atheist movement is 99% anti-Christian and 1% anti-misc. (and this may be being too generous as it may not be a full 1%). Indeed, Atheists prefer to sit in the lucrative comfort of the USA and UK wherein the premise of Judeo-Christian principles keep them wealthy and safe whilst they make a living from promulgating anti-Judeo-Christian propaganda; which is mostly aimed at naturally rebellious, away from mommy and daddy for the first time and randy (as the Brits say) youth.
They would not dare to travel to Muslim countries, etc. and launch into writing books, presenting lectures, doing interviews or any such thing which besmirches Islam, Muslims, the Qur’an or Allah.
In any regards, Richard Dawkins has been the poster boy of the movement which helped Atheism to becoming a caricature of itself. It is difficult to discredit them anymore as they do such a good job of it themselves. In fact, I have a section on my repository website True Freethinker titled BOBA meaning Bottom of the Barrel Atheism. It was meant to house those Atheist arguments that are utterly preposterous. However, any more, any and all of their arguments fit within that category so; what is one to do?
Case in point—and this is not so much an argument but an honest expression of a possible logical conclusion of a worldview based on mindless, unguided series of accidents causing the universe, life and everything—is Richard Dawkins being a big softy when it comes to pedophiles.
Some time ago we noted this in the article “Torture” the Hell of Atheism and the “gentle pedophile” wherein we noted that, as the title implies, Dawkins expressed the view that there are “gentle pedophiles” and we make too much of a fuss about them and ruin their lives for no good reason.
Richard Dawkins shrugged off his own childhood brush with pedophilia, he and his friends experienced having a boarding school teacher who would put his hands in their pants as they sat on his lap. He noted that it was:
“a very unpleasant and embarrassing experience, but the mental trauma was soon exorcised by comparing notes with my contemporaries who had suffered it previously at the hands of the same master.”
In a typical, Atheist caricature form, Dawkins told The Times:
“I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today.”
Firstly, he is “very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours.” But he has built his career as a New Atheist on condemning the Judeo-Christian people of the past as he besmirches the Bible and its historical record of their doings (actually, Dawkins’ misunderstandings, misinterpretations, misapplications and misreadings of their doings).
It is interesting that he claims that “we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism” as the key question is; who is “we.” He does not because he knows very well that the racism of the 18th and 19th centuries was inspired by the founder of his hero worshipping cult; Charles Darwin and his “favored races.” “We” can condemn any racism in all of history when we believe in absolute, universal ethics which apply the same to all people in all times and all places. Dawkins rejects this and so relies on the zeitgeist (the spirit of the age) but, pray tell, what happens when zeitgeist turns into poltergeist (a noisy, troublesome spirit)?
When we know that YHVH created all humans then racism has always been wrong since there are no races but only slight differences. When we adhere to the philosophy called evolution then there are various races and some are less evolved than others.
Richard Dawkins concludes that particular point by stating:
“I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today.”
So, just a few decades ago, the erudite Dawkins thus declares, mild pedophilia (of course there is no such thing) was quaint but not by today’s standards. What a wonderfully powerful reason to reject Atheism; thank you Prof. Dawkins.
He distinguishes between more violent forms of pedophilia vs. “just mild touching up.” And yet, ethically it is all the same; it is a violation for one’s own perverted gratification. That to which he is referring belongs in the litigious realm when courts decide the punishment for the crime.
In part, he bases his statement over concern that as of late there has been a “hysteria” about pedophilia. But again, this is a hysteria that, in part, he is personally responsible for fueling. He has, rightly for once, spoken out loudly and often against Catholic priests and has even called for the Pope to be arrested. This is a fact even though he has written, “I dislike the Roman Catholic Church…and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue.” It has been demonized by Dawkins and no, it has not been unfair. So again, his Atheistic evolutionary worldview has ruined his ability to think clearly and consistently.
In his (self demoted) book The God Delusion Richard Dawkins wrote:
“we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692…the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).”
One could easily see this being quoted by a defense lawyer to protect his pedophile clients.
He then even goes as far questioning whether children who were not simply gently or mildly touched up but brutally raped are telling the truth:
“We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”
The point is not that there is no such thing as “false memories,” etc. but that such children deserve as much protection, respect and help as they can get rather than being skeptically shrugged off by the likes of Dawkins. Richard Dawkins is a very influential person and can get very many people to mobilize to do many things. Why does he not establish a foundation that studies (you know, all scientific-like), cares for and help such children?
Well, that is not about to happen since Atheists do well raising funds for anti-Christian billboards but not for charities, homeless shelters, soup kitchens, hospitals, disaster relief organizations or anything of the sort (for evidence of this, see Are Atheists Healthy, Happy, Moral, etc.?).
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Hat tip to: The Atlantic Wire’s Richard Dawkins Defends ‘Mild’ Pedophilia, Again and Again, September 10, 2013 AD
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
A plea: I have to pay for server usage and have made all content on this website free and always will. I support my family on one income and do research, writing, videos, etc. as a hobby. If you can even spare $1.00 as a donation, please do so: it may not seem like much but if each person reading this would do so, even every now and then, it would add up and really, really help out. Here is my donate/paypal page.
Due to robo-spaming, I had to close the comment sections. However, you can comment on my Facebook page.
Twitter: #RichardDawkins, #pedophilia, #Atheism
Facebook: #RichardDawkins, #pedophilia, #Atheism