As a bit of a joke, under Laconic, I was thinking of replacing "outspoken atheist" with "atheist equivalent of Fred Phelps". It occurred to me that this might be considered offensive, so I'm double-checking. Would that be a problem?
Hide / Show Replies
No because it is a false analogy and would come awfully close to Complaining About People You Dont Like (for both of them)
While I am not sure it is a false analogy, going by some words and actions on the part of both men, I will refrain from adding that text.
On the other hand, would it be acceptable to replace "atheist" with "anti-theist"?
I saw this page and remember reading somewhere that Dawkins was sexually assaulted in his youth. I wonder if the person who did that terrible thing to him was (or claimed to be) religious. Were they? If so, that may have contributed to his contempt of religion. I'm not saying that's how it is, but it would make some sense if that was so.
Edited by quirkygenius Hide / Show Replies
Nothing on this page
.
Thank you. After some research, Dawkins said he was (or claimed to be) here, here and here (On a side note, the third is strange because Dawkins claims his sexual abuse did no lasting harm to him but then says that teaching religion to children is a form of child abuse; sounds quite inconsistent of him [going by what I've read. I hope that's not impolite because I've heard he's something of a Sacred Cow on this site]).
The incidents that lead to people accusing him of Islamophobia should be SOMEWHERE on the page. Neutral as neutral can be, that's a major part of his image now.