Tired
Legend
- Joined
- Feb 7, 2011
- Messages
- 4,768
- Reaction score
- 0
Here at OSR, we enjoy a veritable melting pot of different belief systems. We have Christians, Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Atheists, Agnostics, a Jehovah's Witness, a self-proclaimed Jedi, at least one Pagan, and a few John Cena fans. And somehow, we all manage to get along. I may be called Tired , but you guys know that when I post a story about Richard Dawkins, I am posting a comedy piece written by the biologist. And tonight, he has decided to use different levels of rape to explain morality.
A few days ago, Dawkins claimed that "forcing" a religion on your children is a form of child abuse. But many people pointed out that he has a bit of a twisted view of what counts as child abuse. He recently said that telling children about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or any fairy tale was damaging. But last year, he claimed that "mild paedophilia" (touching up children) did not cause lasting harm. He claimed that a teacher slipped his hand down his shorts when he was a child, and implied that he turned out fine as an adult.
So Dawkins came back with a great argument in a very bad way. He was trying to say that some actions are worse than others. Acknowledging that one is worse does not mean he approves of the less-bad stuff. In other words, just because he believes that telling children about God is worse than "mild paedophilia", it does not mean that he supports paedophilia. If only he had just said that instead.
He started by saying that, "Mild paedophilia is bad. Violent paedophilia is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of mild paedophilia, go away and learn how to think". At first, you may agree with him. But would you tell a child who had been molested that his suffering is not as bad as a child who had been violently molested? He then said that "Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of mild paedophilia, go away and learn how to think". While he is not encouraging rape, he is effectively saying that some kinds are better than others.
He became world famous in 2006 after publishing 'The God Delusion'. In this book, he tried to prove that following any religion or believing in any god was irrational and dangerous. But he did this by inventing his own religion, complete with its own god, and then discussing why his new religion did not make sense. The book was also full of badly researched history and little reference to credible scientific texts. The book was so bad that most of the 13 colleges that gave Dawkins honourary doctorates will no longer allow students to quote Dawkin's work. This includes the college that built a new biology wing based on his work.
A few days ago, Dawkins claimed that "forcing" a religion on your children is a form of child abuse. But many people pointed out that he has a bit of a twisted view of what counts as child abuse. He recently said that telling children about Santa Claus, the Easter Bunny or any fairy tale was damaging. But last year, he claimed that "mild paedophilia" (touching up children) did not cause lasting harm. He claimed that a teacher slipped his hand down his shorts when he was a child, and implied that he turned out fine as an adult.
So Dawkins came back with a great argument in a very bad way. He was trying to say that some actions are worse than others. Acknowledging that one is worse does not mean he approves of the less-bad stuff. In other words, just because he believes that telling children about God is worse than "mild paedophilia", it does not mean that he supports paedophilia. If only he had just said that instead.
He started by saying that, "Mild paedophilia is bad. Violent paedophilia is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of mild paedophilia, go away and learn how to think". At first, you may agree with him. But would you tell a child who had been molested that his suffering is not as bad as a child who had been violently molested? He then said that "Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that's an endorsement of mild paedophilia, go away and learn how to think". While he is not encouraging rape, he is effectively saying that some kinds are better than others.
He became world famous in 2006 after publishing 'The God Delusion'. In this book, he tried to prove that following any religion or believing in any god was irrational and dangerous. But he did this by inventing his own religion, complete with its own god, and then discussing why his new religion did not make sense. The book was also full of badly researched history and little reference to credible scientific texts. The book was so bad that most of the 13 colleges that gave Dawkins honourary doctorates will no longer allow students to quote Dawkin's work. This includes the college that built a new biology wing based on his work.
