Empathy must be expressed towards those poor I just mind my business type of Atheists who pull their hair out every time that the pop-high priest of Atheism, Richard Dawkins, raises his haphazardly evolved head.
Then came elevatorgate (or, in Dawkins’ case, perhaps it is better termed liftgate) whereby male Atheists shrugged off female Atheists concerns about sexual harassment with Dawkins chiming in to say, “Stop whining, will you…”—see article here.
The most recent of the Richard Dawkins’ emotive bombast are his Tweets which stated the following:
X is bad. Y is worse. If you think that’s an endorsement of X, go away and don’t come back until you’ve learned how to think logically.
Mild pedophilia is bad. Violent pedophilia is worse. If you think that’s an endorsement of mild pedophilia, go away and learn how to think.
Date rape is bad. Stranger rape at knifepoint is worse. If you think that’s an endorsement of date rape, go away and learn how to think.
Mild date rape is bad. Violent date rape is worse. Is it really so hard to understand that that doesn’t constitute endorsement of either?
What I have learned today is that there are people on Twitter who think in absolutist terms, to an extent I wouldn’t have believed possible.
There are many more lessons here than that which Dawkins derived such as this is what happens when a biologist and Darwin worshipper is let out of the lab.
Now, of course the law, and the morality upon which it is based, recognizes degrees such as premeditated murder and vehicular homicide.
The issue is that Dawkins’ cult of personality hero worshipers literally believe that no one caused nothing to explode for no reason and so everything came about without meaning and by accident.
Further, Dawkins has declared, ex cathedra, that our only reason for existing is to propagate our DNA—read, reproduce.
Consider that when Justin Brierley asked Dawkins “Ultimately, your belief that rape is wrong is as arbitrary as the fact that we've evolved five fingers rather than six,” the esteemed professor replied, “You could say that, yeah.”
Of course, the biggest issue for Dawkins is that he cannot, based on his Atheism, provide a premise upon which to condemn well, anything at all. In fact, he and many other Atheists claim, for example, that rape played a beneficial role in human evolution: see video series here.
So, if his adherents care about such issues at all, morality and all that jive, they may conclude that, after all, if violent pedophilia is worse then I will commit mild pedophilia (whatever that is), if stranger rape at knifepoint is worse then I will commit date rape, if violent date rape is worse then I will commit mild date rape is bad (whatever that is), etc.
Keep in mind that when an Atheist speaks of pain, suffering, etc. they are referring to our interpretation of bio chemical reactions occurring within the haphazardly evolved gray matter of bio organisms temporarily living upon a spinning rock in the universe’s backwaters.
When a person who believes that they are the result of a series of happy accidents takes such a low view of human life, we should not be surprised.
Now, a guaranteed reply from Dawkins cult of personality hero worshiping cult will be words to the effect of, “Well, okay, maybe perhaps, Dawkins is wrong on this but, but, like, that does not mean that he is wrong about God’s existence and stuff.”
Feel free to take advantage of the free subscription to this page so that you will get an email notification when something is posted herein—see subscribe link above, next to my name…or just CTRL+F and search for “subscribe.”
Find us on: