Atheism’s sexual misconduct problem

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

[Anonymous]

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

DP here.

So it's fine that you are "dumbfounded" but it may be that your frame of reference requires an ultimate authority, like a pope or a pastor? Atheists require no such thing, and as noted, many disagree with them on points, especially Harris.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

Correct. We haver no governing organization, and therefore there is no governing organization that has used that authority to cover up the abuses and protect the abusers, as the Catholic Church indisputably has done.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So you agree 100% with everything you read by everyone you share some opinions with? No, of course you don't.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

Atheists are simply people who do not believe in the supernatural. They are not followers of other atheists in the same sense that Christians, for example follow Jesus or are attached to a particular pastor. Some atheists may like some of the work of prominent atheists, and make a point of watching podcasts, reading articles or attending an occasional live event. That's it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

Gross post, but thanks for insight into why church members protect the accused. It’s because obviously followers concoct stories of molestation for attention. Idiot.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

I think this is top shelf trolling. You went to boarding schools and were molested, would defend the abusers? Yes, indeed troll post.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

Three boarding schools? What did you do to get kicked out of the first two?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

Gross post, but thanks for insight into why church members protect the accused. It’s because obviously followers concoct stories of molestation for attention. Idiot.

LOL. This is Dawkins taking, you numskulls. This is a verbatim quote from Dawkin’s book, The God Delusion. Dawkins is protecting the Catholic Church by asserting that some of the memories of molestation are fake. Re-read the quote and check out the link if you still don’t get it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

Gross post, but thanks for insight into why church members protect the accused. It’s because obviously followers concoct stories of molestation for attention. Idiot.

LOL. This is Dawkins taking, you numskulls. This is a verbatim quote from Dawkin’s book, The God Delusion. Dawkins is protecting the Catholic Church by asserting that some of the memories of molestation are fake. Re-read the quote and check out the link if you still don’t get it.

^^ Dawkins talking….

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

Citation?

From my count, 100% of his DCUM followers are believers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

Gross post, but thanks for insight into why church members protect the accused. It’s because obviously followers concoct stories of molestation for attention. Idiot.

LOL. This is Dawkins taking, you numskulls. This is a verbatim quote from Dawkin’s book, The God Delusion. Dawkins is protecting the Catholic Church by asserting that some of the memories of molestation are fake. Re-read the quote and check out the link if you still don’t get it.

^^ Dawkins talking….

The quote above is not from the God Delusion, it is from the Atlantic article.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Is the reason somebody is bumping ancient Christian-bashing threads to bury this thread about atheism’s sexual abuse problems?

Except you haven’t really proven your case there exists atheist sexual abuse problems. Also, nambla isn’t “for atheists” like the church is for “the religious”.

Also, atheists aren’t a “religion”. I think you read too much conservative media. I’ve seen the conservative articles that try to frame atheism as a religion, so they sort of better categorize it, label it and discredit it, the same way people can about organized religion. Except atheists aren’t a monolithic block like say the Catholic Church.

They’re just people who don’t believe in one of the thousands of different mainstream religions. So, no, dawkins, harris, nambla, are not good examples of people who “lead” atheism because there is no set leader like there is a pope for organized religion. You can’t pin it down so easily and it frustrates you. Atheists don’t care about your religion. They just want to be left alone from it. Organized religion, or at least many of them, have shown to harbor sexually repressed perverts. You can’t say the same about atheism because there is no repression. There are no dogmatic ideals that dictate that be “pious” and not have sex with another human like the church. That repression of sexuality leads to perversion as the multitudes of reports show.

Atheists like Silverman do run atheist orgs, and Dawkins and Harris are thought leaders who sell millions of books and attract many thousands of listeners to their lectures and online videos. You can’t possibly argue they have no influence. You just can’t hide behind, “hey, they don’t represent a ‘religion’ and they don’t run actual churches, so we can ignore them.”

Also, atheists are on DCUM every hour of the day proselytizing for atheism and arguing with people of faith. If you guys didn’t proselytize, you’d have no reason to be here.

Are there specific, I mean actual presentable evidence of cases as seen with churches, of atheist molestations that you can present or is this all anecdotal evident? Also, where did these “atheist leaders” like Harris, Dawkins specifically cover up for the abusers like in the church’s? Did Harris and Dawkins specifically review these molestation and sexual perversions, like Christian church leaders did and specifically try to discredit the accusers and for the priests accused, simply shuffle them to other parish where they could molest kids again, or they sent them into retirement, where they faced no consequence.

So beyond calling these atheist “thought leaders” (who are not actually leading or instructing a “flock” to actually do anything) perverts, where is your tangible evidence of molestation? Previous posts showed hundreds of thousands of church molestation and you produce zilch for atheist molestation other than broad accusations. I continue to be dumbfounded by the resoluteness of your, clearly, baseless assertions, but I can’t seem to stop trying to get you to actually prove something. Your posts are the informational equivalent of eating Doritos. They’re just empty calories with no nutrition.

Honestly, I continue to be dumbfounded by your refusal to contemplate the idea that Dawkins’ support for “mild” pedophelia, or Harris’ support for another prominent atheist accused of sexual abuse, would NOT have an impact on their millions of followers. It’s like you’re waving your hands about their influence on atheists.

You have a rhetorical advantage exactly because atheism doesn’t have an organization that monitors abuse in its ranks or against which people can bring grievances and lawsuits.

But to argue that “listeners” and “readers” aren’t influenced, because they’re not “members” of some group, is mind-boggling. It also reeks of dismissing the problem.

So the issue isn’t “an atheist problem”, it’s a “Dawkins’ followers problem”.

Who knows how many of those people there are. Aside from the few on here who’ve bought his book.

Dawkins’ followers are mostly atheists. And his website reports that just one of his books, The God Delusion, had sold 3.3 million copies worldwide by 2018. He’s given away many more for free. https://richarddawkins.net/2018/03/richard-dawkins-to-give-away-copies-of-the-god-delusion-in-islamic-countries/

The God Delusion, of course, is one of the several places where Dawkins complained about the “hysteria” over pedophelia. This article (https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/09/richard-dawkins-defends-mild-pedophilia-again-and-again/311230/) gives a short excerpt:

“This line of thought goes back at least to 2006 for Dawkins, when he wrote "we live in a time of hysteria about paedophilia, a mob psychology that calls to mind the Salem witch-hunts of 1692," in his popular book the God Delusion. He continued:

All three of the boarding schools I attended employed teachers whose affections for small boys overstepped the bounds of propriety. That was indeed reprehensible. Nevertheless, if, fifty years on, they had been hounded by vigilantes or lawyers as no better than child murderers, I should have felt obliged to come to their defence, even as the victim of one of them (an embarrassing but otherwise harmless experience).

The Roman Catholic Church has borne a heavy share of such retrospective opprobrium. For all sorts of reasons I dislike the Roman Catholic Church. But I dislike unfairness even more, and I can’t help wondering whether this one institution has been unfairly demonized over the issue, especially in Ireland and America… We should be aware of the remarkable power of the mind to concoct false memories, especially when abetted by unscrupulous therapists and mercenary lawyers. The psychologist Elizabeth Loftus has shown great courage, in the face of spiteful vested interests, in demonstrating how easy it is for people to concoct memories that are entirely false but which seem, to the victim, every bit as real as true memories. This is so counter-intuitive that juries are easily swayed by sincere but false testimony from witnesses.”

Gross post, but thanks for insight into why church members protect the accused. It’s because obviously followers concoct stories of molestation for attention. Idiot.

LOL. This is Dawkins taking, you numskulls. This is a verbatim quote from Dawkin’s book, The God Delusion. Dawkins is protecting the Catholic Church by asserting that some of the memories of molestation are fake. Re-read the quote and check out the link if you still don’t get it.

^^ Dawkins talking….

The quote above is not from the God Delusion, it is from the Atlantic article.

OMG. The Atlantic is quoting Dawkins. It’s a direct quote from The God Delusion. I hate to bring up readout comprehension problems, but have you considered that you have them?

[Anonymous]

Maybe some of the people who’ve bought or read his book can chime in on what it’s like to follow him.

Has it affected your opinion of pedophilia?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Maybe some of the people who’ve bought or read his book can chime in on what it’s like to follow him.

Has it affected your opinion of pedophilia?

So you don’t care that Dawkins is, you know, defending pedophilia in the Catholic Church? Instead you’re still trying to win some internet pissing contest. Got it.