In a recent interview with the Times magazine, Richard Dawkins attempted to defend what he called "mild pedophilia," which, he says, he personally experienced as a young child and does not believe causes "lasting harm."
Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters "pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts," and that to condemn this "mild touching up" as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.
"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," he said.
Plus, he added, though his other classmates also experienced abuse at the hands of this teacher, "I don't think he did any of us lasting harm."
https://www.salon.com/2013/09/10/richard_dawkins_defends_mild_pedophilia_says_it_does_not_cause_lasting_harm/
This is not the first time. Multiple times he has tried to normalize pedophilia.
https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c1iSxEtgEGs
What the hell is wrong with this man?
Wikipedia on him:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Dawkins
Dawkins has been awarded many prestigious academic and writing awards and he makes regular television, radio and Internet appearances, predominantly discussing his books, his atheism, and his ideas and opinions as a public intellectual.
He has won numerous awards and is known as one of the world's top scientists. Seriously.
view the rest of the comments →
GeorgeT ago
I like how he advocated material universe and mainstream science while saying that his grasp of quantum mechanics is abysmal! A prisoner of thought of his owm making. A joke! (Am an Engineer, and I come from a family of prominent scientist and I put Dawking in Degrasse Tyson category - frauds propped up by the pedo/satanic/ globalists. Before one disses something he would be adviced to do some reaarch. Religion such as Christianity, New Testament (whether you interpret it literally or see it as an allegory - my view) is a necessary element in our culture and primary function of which serves as a moral compass, safeguarding us from the very abominations that has come to be known as PG! Dawkins is a traitor to human morality and to humanity in general. That useful idiot is oblivious to the fact that Darwin was sponsored by the Luciferians with the aim of denigrating humam to a mere evolved ape, divorced from God (again, literal or allegorical - all the same) thus legitimizing all his actions including such abomination as pedophilia as mere animal instinct. I really do wish to have my chance to debate with that fool and take him apart. I digress but, I must state Darwin's theory is not a scientific theory, for though it explains how species evolve it cannot predict!! And a scientific theory whether it's Newtonian Mechanics or Quantum Mechanics, or General Relativity - as mind boggling as the concepts may seem, they all predict! Now take a peculiar specie such as Leopard Cheetah (fastest land animal on earth, covers 100m in 5.95s!!!) It's DNA is so precise that you can graft a fur from one Leopard onto another and it will not be rejected! You cannot transplant human hair onto another - it will be rejected. Hence the ongoing quest to cure male pattern boldness. The conclusion is that the only specie that Cheetah could have evolved from is - Leopard Cheetah. I digressed but my point being that even though I do not believe in a creation (or the creator) I have qualms about denouncing idiocy such as Darwinian Evolution and its shill proponents such as Richard Dawking. He has served his pedo/satanic masters very well and subsequently he got rewarded.
GreenDell144 ago
Biology and anthropology are fascinatingly complex. Just to replicate DNA, an organic molecule has to zip along the DNA strand at the speed of a train (in relative terms) covering the entire chromosome very quickly (which for our species has about as much data as the internet), It reads the DNA in front of it, collect the huge and complex proteins (and correctly fold them), carefully unzip the helix, arrange the proteins in the way that they were read, re-zip the helix, and lastly check for errors (flagging a protein alert if one is found). All of these happen in a barely understood way, because all that is detectable is the result, which happens very frequently (in the digestive system it happens in seconds). Materialist say that this molecular robot, a replication ribosome, happened by chance, Google it and select images. There are no good ones. It’s too small. The best argument they have is that we are too dumb to understand and that we should trust them.
Because of this complexity, self proclaimed ‘experts’ can step in and hypnotize the masses. The say “trust us, we know” and “ it is probably to hard for you to understand”. This works great for atheists, especially those WHO DON’T WANT God to exist (regardless of whether He does or not).
I believe that viruses are the apparatus for changes in species. Check out the mimivirus. I wonder if a virus like this could be responsible for directing species to change. Then the question becomes “Who controls the virus?”. No transitional forms. Tons of inaccuracies. Tons of hoaxes. I teach that evolution is a respectable theory, because I have to, but I haven’t believed for decades. I used to believe in evolution. By the time I completed my studies in anthropology, I was completely red pilled. The odds against are astronomical, and all of its best points are cherry picked evidences, refuted hokum, or retracted BS. Blind faith, virtue signaling, cognitive dissonance and elitism keep it popular.
GeorgeT ago
Great piece. Would love to read your essays on the subject.
GreenDell144 ago
I actually stand on the shoulders of others, I admit. I teach Biology, but I am most impressed by the ones doing research in the field.
GeorgeT ago
We have unseen operators at work, beyond 5 sense reality. Just because I am not a creatinist does not make me an atheist which is another cult.
GreenDell144 ago
That speaks to your ability to reason. Its a shame that most refuse to feed their mind and farm their thinking respinsibilities out to others. Have you ever considered the mimivirus? I subscribe to the old school virology thinking: it doesnt eat/grow/repeoduce/etc... So it doesnt classify as a living thing. Viruses infiltrate and insert DNA instructions into cells of living things. The cells use thise instructions to do all of the virus' hard work. Check out a virus that has DNA for eyes, gills, photosynthesis, and abilities unkown from several species:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=gcYH6se6Cdo
The popular explanation against the theory that I put here is based on a special theory of evolution for viruses. This theory has some very weak points: assumes evolution, then applies it to viruses w/o any evidence. Popular scientists dont want to consider the obvious; that mimivirus inserts instructions into cells that cause them to change and do things as a new 'species'. "Viral Selection" is a compelling theory, despite its censorship. Enjoy!
GeorgeT ago
Thanks for the link. I will watch it several times. Frome Umberto Eco's Name of the Rose Apprentice 'Do you ever make mistakes?' William of Baskerville answers: 'Of course I do, but instead of one I conjure many, so I become the slave of none!' If only our new class of priests (scientists, doctors etc) abide by this noble principle.