The Miley Cyrus of philosophers:
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.–Richard Dawkins
Unfortunately, caning of (non-predatory) adult law-breakers is still verboten to “civilized” people, who prefers caging them with predators for years at a time.
The following picture is not due to any sort of human predation. But it does bridge a coming analogy between “mild” pedophilia and anaphylaxis.
This picture is Wikipedia’s iconic image for a deadly serious health concern, least you think the child’s privacy is infringed.
Unlike most “militant” atheists, Mr. Dawkins is not a coward. So it was a real hoot a few days ago when he Tweeted:
“All the world’s Muslims have fewer Nobel Prizes than Trinity College, Cambridge. They did great things in the Middle Ages, though.”
Burn! A snotty and wordy burn, but how else would professors talk trash? Let me try one.
“All the world’s Aggies have fewer National Titles than the University of Alabama. They did great things in 1939, though.”
This isn’t my sort of thing. Utter destruction of the enemy is statement enough. And if you can’t annihilate your foes, why on Earth would you provoke them?! (Also if your Dad is a God-fearing itinerate preacher who will spank you a new one if he catches you trash-talking…you won’t be doing that. But if you insist on it, as Richard Dawkins does, be a man about it, as he is.
And he sure does crave attention, doesn’t he? Condoning pedophilia in any form! Of course, since “defending Dawkins” is in this post’s very title, you might be questioning my judgment as well. Unless there’s more to this? Yep.
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. … 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.”
You know what? He’s quite possibly right. I mean, I’ve been stung by bees and wasps numerous times. So were most of the rural boys I knew, and none of us suffered lasting harm. Of course…we weren’t susceptible to anaphylactic shock.
So, does Dawkins consider the
possibility certainty that children’s reactions to sexual groping will differ? Nope. Is he aware that what’s “mild” to him is life-shattering to susceptible kids? Nope. And thus, this tepid defense of him. He doesn’t hate children, he’s narcissistic.
Now, belief in a deity can certainly lead to problems. A billion-member religion that wins fewer Nobels than Trinity College is proof of that. But atheism has its own hazards, and one of those is certainly narcissism. Belief in God retards self-worship…even if God doesn’t exist. Yes, yes, Obama professes God, and his narcissism dwarfs Dawkins’. But is it possible that not everything Barack says is true?
It seems unlikely that Richard Dawkins will have a Road to Damascus moment with regards to God. Obviously I pray that he does. And also, less importantly, that he’ll have that same blinding insight when it comes to “mild” pedophilia.