tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post629847558778795335..comments2024-03-27T17:15:37.606-04:00Comments on Triablogue: Dawkins on the warpathRyanhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/17809283662428917799noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-67815058942942843682010-09-22T05:17:00.976-04:002010-09-22T05:17:00.976-04:00Controversial as this may be.. given that Dawkins ...Controversial as this may be.. given that Dawkins and many other New Atheists A) clearly approve of homosexual behavior, and B) also approve of sexual relationships among the young (See many modern secular takes on age of consent laws, etc), and C) the claim that apparently many of the sex abuse cases in the Catholic church was related to adolescent males rather than prepubescent children... don't the claims of outrage on the part of NAs ring a little hollow?<br /><br />I mean, it would depend on the cases in question. Some kind of forceful rape would still be condemnable (though there would still be problems there for a moral relativist or nihilist.) But if someone approves of homosexual behavior, and also thinks the age of consent should be lower / has no problem with sexually active children, then... well, I guess that speaks for itself.<br /><br />Especially given that, if I recall correctly, Dawkins himself downplayed sexual abuse and said that teaching children about hell (or perhaps even just raising them in a religious household) was 'more harmful'.<br /><br />Either way, Dawkins comes off like such a joke in this speech. For more reasons than were given in the commentary - and that list alone is enough to dismiss the man as a serious force for 'reason'.Crudehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04178390947423928444noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-11534598721798204652010-09-21T08:52:22.519-04:002010-09-21T08:52:22.519-04:00"Moreover, aren’t homosexuals defective by ev..."Moreover, aren’t homosexuals defective by evolutionary standards? They don’t transmit their smart genes to the next generation."<br /><br />This admission is one of those things you rarely if ever hear from secular evolutionists.Robhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13068196575763786944noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-7706673765232767332010-09-20T20:42:48.064-04:002010-09-20T20:42:48.064-04:00(1) Doesn't Dawkins think that parents are com...(1) Doesn't Dawkins think that parents are committing child abuse by enrolling their children (without the children's consent) in religious schools? I believe he's likened it to brainwashing. So why is a young German who is enrolled, without his consent, in the Hitlersjugend a culprit rather than a victim? Why doesn't Dawkins sneer at adult Catholics that they "chose" to go to a Christian Brothers or Marist or Jesuit school at age 12?<br /><br />(2) Dunno about PapaRatzi but numerous conservative RCs do in fact claim that condoms don't prevent HIV/ AIDs - either because they are not used correctly, or because the HIV cells are smaller than the holes in latex, or something.<br /><br />My understanding from listening to the secular critics is that condoms both (a) are such a perfect safeguard against HIV/ AIDS cells that their mere availability would allow promiscuous sex with strangers to take place free of adverse consequences, and (b) are such an imperfect safeguard against semen that their mere availability in no way reduces the need for abortion to be available to prevent women (though not men) from becoming parents "against their will".<br /><br />(c) Due to the structure of many RC parishes, it would be easier for a priest attracted to boys to predate unchecked than one attracted to girls. Traditionally, RCS were wary of men seducing females (and of females using their wiles), but same-sex attraction was such an unthinkable abomination to them as to be off the radar. Eg, if a priest were to give teenage girls lifts, unchaperoned, in his car, then eyebrows would be raised (at the very least), because after all, he was a normal man. But if you raised concerns about a priestgiving teenage boys unchaperoned lifts in his car - why, you were accusing him of the vile sin of homosexuality! Unthinkable! What a filthy mind you must have!<br /><br />So the conservative RCs built a Maginot line of safeguards that were, we know in hindsight, facing the wrong direction. As a result, the proportion of homosexual paedophile RC priests is larger, it appears, than the proportion of homosexual men in the general population.Tom Rhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06246157794276270490noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-41920986578172795862010-09-20T18:23:22.497-04:002010-09-20T18:23:22.497-04:00In the priestly abuse scandal, there was a very hi...In the priestly abuse scandal, there was a very high correlation between the gender of the victim and the gender of the abuser. So homosexuality is not incidental or coincidental.<br /><br />And most of the abuse was directed at adolescent males, not prepubescent kids.stevehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16547070544928321788noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-88667115410136380752010-09-20T17:53:40.279-04:002010-09-20T17:53:40.279-04:00i) Dawkins attacks Ratzinger for failing to crack ...<i>i) Dawkins attacks Ratzinger for failing to crack down on pedophile priests, but he also attacks Ratzinger for failing to be more open to homosexuals in the priesthood. But, of course, it’s homosexual priests who prey on underage boys. Dawkins political correctness is at war with his blind indignation.</i><br /><br />I just want to clarify that a homosexual isn't automatically a pedophile and neither is every pedophile a homosexual. <br /><br />In fact, I'd venture to say most homosexuals are not pedophiles. <br /><br />Anyways, for the most part the sex of the child doesn't matter to a pedophile because they aren't physically developed yet and are for the most part physically the same. Thus it is not unusual for them to prey on both sexes though they may generally keep to the one.Alen Basichttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14387315634345374828noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6789188.post-73378826999034438462010-09-20T15:30:42.983-04:002010-09-20T15:30:42.983-04:00It always strikes me as strange when atheists argu...It always strikes me as strange when atheists argue that women are qualified for ordination while also arguing that Christian pastors perform a useless, or even a detrimental, service to their people. Basically, they're saying that women are as qualified to harm humanity as are men, and churches ought to be letting them do so.Reehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14173588306100422241noreply@blogger.com