Atheism’s sexual misconduct problem

[Anonymous]

Never an excuse for sexual abuse of a minor. I’m not sure what your intent is - looking to excuse sexual abuse within religions where there are coverups and abusers are protected? Clearly it’s always wrong - just especially galling when the hypocrisy of someone in a position of religious authority uses their position to harm minors. Abusers are in all religions - or in none; it’s not sexual pleasure but rather power and control that drives them. Extra gallling when religious have an organized internal policy to protect the abuser and allow them to harm more kids under that banner of forgiveness/avoiding scandal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders. Pretending they’re irrelevant because they don’t run organizations is disengenuous.

No. They are SUPER important to all atheists. We all listen to every word they say. Because they are THOUGHT LEADERS. Like, I don’t even have a thought about Atheism with consulting their Inspired works.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wondering out loud: what if Catholics treated their sexual abuse scandals in the same contemptuous, mocking, dismissive way as the atheists here treat their sexual abuse problems?

Just learned that Dawkins is British. Which clearly makes him a British leader. Can we talk about British sexual abuse problems? Any Brits on this threat care to discuss why your leader is supportive of pedophilia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Richard Dawkins is not “the leading atheist” and you saying it doesn’t make it true. He wrote several prominent books on atheism and is an egotistical prck. One person does not reflect atheism in total. His opinion, or whatever stupid comment he made, does not prove atheism promulgates child molestation. Let me dumb it down for you because you seem to like having a central masthead to castigate. Richard Dawkins is not our infallible pope figure. Understand?

Please read the articles I sent on the hundreds of thousands of provable cases of molestation and then re-examine your ideas and then come to us with better posts.

So, you still refuse to condemn Dawkins.

Also, you don’t care that the atheist who has published the most books and has the most speaking engagements condones pedophilia in schools.

Got it.

Fck dawkins! What is your odd obsession with this one person who isn’t the leading anything in the atheist movement????

No one cares about fking dawkins except you!

We care about the hundreds of thousands of kids molested by priests which is orders of magnitude worse than anything else.

You’re being completely dishonest when you say Dawkins doesn’t “lead” anything. He may not lead an organization, but millions of people have read his books or heard his lectures, including the talk where he said mild pedophilia was ok.

Sounds like you are one of those millions.

+1

PP is obsessed with Hawkins.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG atheism isn't an organized religion you weirdos.

But twenty of them started clubs and sold a bunch of books, so it's basically the same.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG atheism isn't an organized religion you weirdos.

But twenty of them started clubs and sold a bunch of books, so it's basically the same.

Damn atheist cabal and their thought leaders! I saw Dawkins on YouTube! He wrote a book! I know he is leading them atheists and their getting ready to molest untold numbers! I seen it! Why can’t you see it???? Why can’t you validate meeee????!!!! I want this thread to go on and on until every last one of you says Dawkins is a bigger molester than the church! Say it! I need you to validate me. No, I will not provide any statistics, settled investigation or real proof but you gotta take my word for it!

And I will demonstrate my poor logic and inability to grasp reality with every post!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders. Pretending they’re irrelevant because they don’t run organizations is disengenuous.

Ahh no it isn’t. Many atheists disagree with the. On stuff, especially Harris. You fail. Again.

Atheists buy their books in the millions and download their YouTube videos in the tens of thousands. What are you talking about? They’re thought leaders.

This is crazy, I know, but not everyone who bought his book is an atheist. You can read something without being an atheist. And that book may not even lead to atheism. It’s crazy. I mean I tried to read the bible, but they said “begat” to many fking times, so I stopped. I actually didn’t become a Christian.

A friend of mine who is a theologian has bought some of Dawkin's books. Because not everyone is afraid that if they read something they will be "converted" or start believing what they read.

[Anonymous]

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. Atheists aren’t connected to each other. We don’t look to other for guidance. And we certainly don’t have “thought leaders”.

You can’t see that because you are stuck in your religious frame of reference. You can’t imagine life without that framework. And it appears you have no intellectual curiosity to even attempt to see it any differently. Sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders. Pretending they’re irrelevant because they don’t run organizations is disengenuous.

Ahh no it isn’t. Many atheists disagree with the. On stuff, especially Harris. You fail. Again.

Atheists buy their books in the millions and download their YouTube videos in the tens of thousands. What are you talking about? They’re thought leaders.

This is crazy, I know, but not everyone who bought his book is an atheist. You can read something without being an atheist. And that book may not even lead to atheism. It’s crazy. I mean I tried to read the bible, but they said “begat” to many fking times, so I stopped. I actually didn’t become a Christian.

A friend of mine who is a theologian has bought some of Dawkin's books. Because not everyone is afraid that if they read something they will be "converted" or start believing what they read.

I’m religious and I’ve read Dawkins too.

I don’t get the argument that because some religious people buy his books, we should ignore his support for pederasty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote: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. Atheists aren’t connected to each other. We don’t look to other for guidance. And we certainly don’t have “thought leaders”.

You can’t see that because you are stuck in your religious frame of reference. You can’t imagine life without that framework. And it appears you have no intellectual curiosity to even attempt to see it any differently. Sad.

You clearly don’t know what a thought leader is. Google it and come back to us.

Also, do you really think people buy his books because they want to reject all his ideas?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Never an excuse for sexual abuse of a minor. I’m not sure what your intent is - looking to excuse sexual abuse within religions where there are coverups and abusers are protected? Clearly it’s always wrong - just especially galling when the hypocrisy of someone in a position of religious authority uses their position to harm minors. Abusers are in all religions - or in none; it’s not sexual pleasure but rather power and control that drives them. Extra gallling when religious have an organized internal policy to protect the abuser and allow them to harm more kids under that banner of forgiveness/avoiding scandal.

Or when an atheist organization hires a known rapist (Silverman) after he was fired from a different atheist organization just hours before the press ran a story on how he abused two women. Cover-ups anywhere, whether in religion or atheism, are despicable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote: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. Atheists aren’t connected to each other. We don’t look to other for guidance. And we certainly don’t have “thought leaders”.

You can’t see that because you are stuck in your religious frame of reference. You can’t imagine life without that framework. And it appears you have no intellectual curiosity to even attempt to see it any differently. Sad.

You clearly don’t know what a thought leader is. Google it and come back to us.

Also, do you really think people buy his books because they want to reject all his ideas?

Again, totally different mindset. No thought leaders.

So far we only know a few religious people on here who’ve bought his books… Maybe they are athecurious?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders. Pretending they’re irrelevant because they don’t run organizations is disengenuous.

Ahh no it isn’t. Many atheists disagree with the. On stuff, especially Harris. You fail. Again.

Atheists buy their books in the millions and download their YouTube videos in the tens of thousands. What are you talking about? They’re thought leaders.

This is crazy, I know, but not everyone who bought his book is an atheist. You can read something without being an atheist. And that book may not even lead to atheism. It’s crazy. I mean I tried to read the bible, but they said “begat” to many fking times, so I stopped. I actually didn’t become a Christian.

A friend of mine who is a theologian has bought some of Dawkin's books. Because not everyone is afraid that if they read something they will be "converted" or start believing what they read.

I’m religious and I’ve read Dawkins too.

I don’t get the argument that because some religious people buy his books, we should ignore his support for pederasty.

Literally, no one said “ignore” it.

Woosh. Go back and re-read the thread.

[Anonymous]

OP didn’t like the Dawkins link from “a British author”?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Rather than be buried on the LDS thread, this topic deserves it’s own thread.

We can kick it off with this: David Thorstad, a prominent atheist, founded the North American Man/Boy Love Association (NAMBLA) to advocate for pedophilia and pederasty.

Is this some kind of cover for the Catholic church?