Atheism’s sexual misconduct problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s interesting about this thread is that OP has mostly established that the Catholic Church is equivalent to NAMBLA.

Equivalent to atheists in general, you mean. Why you guys keep trying to discount abuse in schools, sports, the Boy Scouts, the atheist orgs who hired that sexual predator, and Dawkins is a mystery. But those remain as facts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What’s interesting about this thread is that OP has mostly established that the Catholic Church is equivalent to NAMBLA.

Yup. That’s what I got out of her posts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has criticized Dawkins for supporting “moderate” pedophilia. Is he off-limits or something?

No one cares about Dawkins. He’s just some random dude. I only heard about him from the atheist bashers on DCUM.

Who said atheists take sexual abuse by atheists—in this case, the world’s most prominent atheist—seriously? That doesn’t seem to be the case.

Does anyone excuse his actions? Is he in a position to have power over children like a priest of a boy scout leader?

Dawkins was talking about his own experiences being groped by a teacher at boarding school and said it wasn’t so bad. He concluded from that that “mild” pedophila was OK. Do you think no teachers listened to that?

So the leading atheist sanctions pedophelia in schools. Is there a single one of you who wants to say this is maybe, possibly, not a great thing?

Hawkins is a douchebag. Lock him up if he did anything criminal.

But he isn’t “the leading atheist”. There is no organization for him to lead.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s interesting about this thread is that OP has mostly established that the Catholic Church is equivalent to NAMBLA.

Equivalent to atheists in general, you mean. Why you guys keep trying to discount abuse in schools, sports, the Boy Scouts, the atheist orgs who hired that sexual predator, and Dawkins is a mystery. But those remain as facts.

* and families. The only thing atheists have to help them is that nobody collects stats on the religion, or lack thereof, of abusers in these secular organizations. But these are secular organizations.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has criticized Dawkins for supporting “moderate” pedophilia. Is he off-limits or something?

No one cares about Dawkins. He’s just some random dude. I only heard about him from the atheist bashers on DCUM.

Who said atheists take sexual abuse by atheists—in this case, the world’s most prominent atheist—seriously? That doesn’t seem to be the case.

He’s just some random dude with no ties to me. Lock up all abusers. He has nothing to do with atheists.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has criticized Dawkins for supporting “moderate” pedophilia. Is he off-limits or something?

No one cares about Dawkins. He’s just some random dude. I only heard about him from the atheist bashers on DCUM.

Who said atheists take sexual abuse by atheists—in this case, the world’s most prominent atheist—seriously? That doesn’t seem to be the case.

Does anyone excuse his actions? Is he in a position to have power over children like a priest of a boy scout leader?

19:58 said “No one cares about Dawkins.”

No one cares about him *as an atheist* because there isn’t some big atheist organization. He’s just some random dude. Lock him up if he’s abusing anyone - just like you’d lock up any other random dude.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has criticized Dawkins for supporting “moderate” pedophilia. Is he off-limits or something?

No one cares about Dawkins. He’s just some random dude. I only heard about him from the atheist bashers on DCUM.

Who said atheists take sexual abuse by atheists—in this case, the world’s most prominent atheist—seriously? That doesn’t seem to be the case.

Does anyone excuse his actions? Is he in a position to have power over children like a priest of a boy scout leader?

Dawkins was talking about his own experiences being groped by a teacher at boarding school and said it wasn’t so bad. He concluded from that that “mild” pedophila was OK. Do you think no teachers listened to that?

So the leading atheist sanctions pedophelia in schools. Is there a single one of you who wants to say this is maybe, possibly, not a great thing?

Hawkins is a douchebag. Lock him up if he did anything criminal.

But he isn’t “the leading atheist”. There is no organization for him to lead.

Don’t play dumb unless English isn’t your first language. “Leading” also means “prominent” in the sense of widely published, many honors, lots of speaking engagements. Check out his Wikipedia page to see all the honors.

It’s like dealing with toddlers here…. Either you guys are actually in kindergarten, or you’re completely dishonest.

[Anonymous]

To recap for the slow folks in the back:

Individuals should be held accountable for their actions - such as abusing others.

Organizations should be held accountable for their actions - such as covering up abuses.

Atheism isn’t an organization.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What’s interesting about this thread is that OP has mostly established that the Catholic Church is equivalent to NAMBLA.

Equivalent to atheists in general, you mean. Why you guys keep trying to discount abuse in schools, sports, the Boy Scouts, the atheist orgs who hired that sexual predator, and Dawkins is a mystery. But those remain as facts.

Well, I agree with you that the Catholic Church is like NAMBLA, but as you have correctly pointed out, the Boy Scouts are also like NAMBLA. Catholics, NAMBLA, Boy Scouts, also several other religions share a history of egregious sexual abuse that is covered up.

Seems like we actually agree on a lot. Glad you agree that churches are like NAMLA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has criticized Dawkins for supporting “moderate” pedophilia. Is he off-limits or something?

No one cares about Dawkins. He’s just some random dude. I only heard about him from the atheist bashers on DCUM.

Who said atheists take sexual abuse by atheists—in this case, the world’s most prominent atheist—seriously? That doesn’t seem to be the case.

Does anyone excuse his actions? Is he in a position to have power over children like a priest of a boy scout leader?

Dawkins was talking about his own experiences being groped by a teacher at boarding school and said it wasn’t so bad. He concluded from that that “mild” pedophila was OK. Do you think no teachers listened to that?

So the leading atheist sanctions pedophelia in schools. Is there a single one of you who wants to say this is maybe, possibly, not a great thing?

Hawkins is a douchebag. Lock him up if he did anything criminal.

But he isn’t “the leading atheist”. There is no organization for him to lead.

Don’t play dumb unless English isn’t your first language. “Leading” also means “prominent” in the sense of widely published, many honors, lots of speaking engagements. Check out his Wikipedia page to see all the honors.

It’s like dealing with toddlers here…. Either you guys are actually in kindergarten, or you’re completely dishonest.

None of that means he’s associated with other atheists. There is no atheist organization. He’s just some random dude who may have done bad sh1t.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Nobody has criticized Dawkins for supporting “moderate” pedophilia. Is he off-limits or something?

No one cares about Dawkins. He’s just some random dude. I only heard about him from the atheist bashers on DCUM.

Who said atheists take sexual abuse by atheists—in this case, the world’s most prominent atheist—seriously? That doesn’t seem to be the case.

Does anyone excuse his actions? Is he in a position to have power over children like a priest of a boy scout leader?

Dawkins was talking about his own experiences being groped by a teacher at boarding school and said it wasn’t so bad. He concluded from that that “mild” pedophila was OK. Do you think no teachers listened to that?

So the leading atheist sanctions pedophelia in schools. Is there a single one of you who wants to say this is maybe, possibly, not a great thing?

Hawkins is a douchebag. Lock him up if he did anything criminal.

But he isn’t “the leading atheist”. There is no organization for him to lead.

And no atheists anywhere ever listen to him. Oh wait….

Stop being a lying d*bag

[Anonymous]

It’s actually kind of nice to see a religious poster being open about how religious organizations are equivalent to NAMBLA. That’s unusually honest. Usually they want to hide the history of sexual abuse in religious organizations.

[Anonymous]

Interesting. There were no actual purchasers for Dawkins’ best-selling books. People turn off their TVs when he comes on. Nobody attends his many, many lectures.

You people are despicable, trying to downplay his role in atheism in order to wave your hands at his support for pedophila.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s actually kind of nice to see a religious poster being open about how religious organizations are equivalent to NAMBLA. That’s unusually honest. Usually they want to hide the history of sexual abuse in religious organizations.

OP here. Thanks. But I need to correct you (again—please stop with the distortions already).

It’s equivalent to atheism in general. Including the two atheist orgs who hired that predatory sleazeball and secular organizations like the Boy Scouts, schools, and sports.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s actually kind of nice to see a religious poster being open about how religious organizations are equivalent to NAMBLA. That’s unusually honest. Usually they want to hide the history of sexual abuse in religious organizations.

OP here. Thanks. But I need to correct you (again—please stop with the distortions already).

It’s equivalent to atheism in general. Including the two atheist orgs who hired that predatory sleazeball and secular organizations like the Boy Scouts, schools, and sports.

NP - “atheism in general” isn’t a thing. If that’s what your central argument is based around, it’s a non-starter. Atheists, by definition, are not members of organized religions. Boy Scouts isn’t an atheist organization solely because it’s secular, for example. You’re not making the point you think you’re making.