Richard Dawkins defends “mild pedophilia,” says it does not cause “lasting harm”

by chrisuk 320 Replies latest watchtower child-abuse

  • cofty
    cofty

    This thread is a testimony to the lure of strawman arguments.

    Totally misrepresent what another person said and then attack that thing mercilessly.

    Outlaw and his "lurkers" are masters of the fallacy.

    EVERYBODY in this thread thinks that touching a child inappropriately, even once, is an appalling crime. The perpetrator ought to have been reported to the police immediately and a full investigation launched.

    There is nobody who thinks it was unimportant or that is didn't have the potential to do great harm. The man was a pedophile and should never have been left unsupervised with a child for the rest of his life.

    HOWEVER - the incident Dawkins described was "mild" IN COMPARISON to the things that have happened to other children. The consequences for Dawkins were less significant than it may have been.

    This sort of conduct was not taken as seriously in previous generations. That it wasn't was partly down to ignorance and perhaps deference. There was also a stoical attitude among upper-class public schools that it was a virtue to not complain. Thankfully things have changed.

    It is sad that so many on this forum are so willing to to grossly twist the statements of others for no reason other than their own ego and vindictive nature.

    When we post on JWN be warned you are not entirely among friends.

  • Qcmbr
    Qcmbr

    I remember a poster who used to use lots of CAPITALS and who is best buds with Outlaw. Hmm.

  • villagegirl
    villagegirl

    grossly twist the statements of others for no reason other than their own ego and vindictive nature. - Cofty

    Right then, this statement above; not "vindictive" or "personalized" at all.

    When we post on JWN be warned you are not entirely among friends. - Cofty

    Really ? Who could have guessed, since you are all long time Bible readers, Elders and moralists, I thought was safe here , among gentlemen and civilized intellectuals. You mean I am liable to be attacked ? How unscientific.

    Vindictive:

    Definition: Vindictive |vinˈdiktiv| adjective
    having or showing a strong or unreasoning desire for revenge: as in, the criticism was both vindictive and personalized.

  • cofty
    cofty

    VG - Your tactics in this thread have been deplorable.

    You accused people who care passionately about child protection, but who don't see issues in the same way as you of being pedophiles. That is despicable.

    You see atheists as the enemy and there is nothing you won't do to attack them. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt. All doubt is now gone.

    Qcmbr - Outlaw is channelling mesages from the other side. By that I mean the christian "voice-hearers" who were banned for being insufferable idiots.

  • Witness My Fury
    Witness My Fury

    Outlaw is channelling mesages from the other side. By that I mean the christian "voice-hearers" who were banned for being insufferable idiots.

    I assumed as much myself. What a tool.

  • cofty
    cofty

    It is wrong that we have to suffer their irrational rants via their lackey Outlaw after they have been banned from posting here.

  • OUTLAW
    OUTLAW

    I remember a poster who used to use lots of CAPITALS and who is best buds with Outlaw. Hmm......Qcmbr

    Who would that be Qcmbr?..

    ................................................. photo mutley-ani1.gif...OUTLAW

  • cofty
    cofty

    It`s WRONG to Minimilize any sort of Sexual Child Abuse..

    Yes of course it is. We have all said that many times over. Nobody is minimising anything.

    I actually said...


    EVERYBODY in this thread thinks that touching a child inappropriately, even once, is an appalling crime. The perpetrator ought to have been reported to the police immediately and a full investigation launched.

    There is nobody who thinks it was unimportant or that is didn't have the potential to do great harm. The man was a pedophile and should never have been left unsupervised with a child for the rest of his life.


    Does that sound like minimising?

    I am not giving Dawkins a pass, I am just not prepared to twist what people have said in order to provide a platform to express moral outrage.

    Please stop posting nonsense from the voice-hearers. They were banned for good reason.

  • defender of truth
  • truthseekeriam
    truthseekeriam

    "mild in comparison" What exactly does that mean?

    It's not about the action, it's about the fear, the confusion, the trust...these are the things that never go away! Wounds heal, but the emotional aspect lasts forever.

    My daughter wasn't raped, but that doesn't change her struggles to trust again. It doesn't change the fear she lives in every single day. It breaks my heart to watch her struggle.

    Our lives were forever changed by something some may label "mild in comparasion" let me tell you, there is nothing mild about our life right now :(

Share this

Google+
Pinterest
Reddit