Richard Dawkins – Why Many People Cannot Stand Him

Richard Dawkins – Why Many People Cannot Stand Him

The majority of people who express contempt for Richard Dawkins do not do so because he is “shrill” or “conceited”. They despise him because he unapologetically treads all over a cherished tradition that furiously forbids the criticism of religion. This tradition has shielded religion from much-needed criticism and ridicule.  In the process of protecting this ancient and idiotic institution, this malign tradition has protected ignorance, barbarism, misogyny, and has been the proud proponent of unspeakable human rights abuses. Despite all of this, many still find it very difficult to ignore this silly and dangerous social relic from the ancient world.

Many of Richard Dawkins’ critics are self-professed Liberals, yet they find it impossible to walk the walk when it comes to their own liberalism.  They become outraged when someone expresses contempt for religions that foster and zealously promote gender-inequality, homophobia, misogyny, totalitarianism, and all of the other anti-Liberal values which should be despised by those who call themselves Liberal.  Dawkins doesn’t stray from his liberalism. He does not turn an apathetic blind eye to the suffering of the victims of conservative and totalitarian religions. He refuses to sit quietly and allow religious zealots and pseudo-Liberals to work hand in hand to dilute and dismantle the fundamental human rights of his fellow human beings, and for this, I suspect, many cannot stand him.

8 thoughts on “Richard Dawkins – Why Many People Cannot Stand Him

  1. And there is also the envy of him, that adds to their frustration. Their contribution to the movement is so small, that a mere tweet from Dawkins passes anything they have done. This highlights their lack and being small minded, they attack.

  2. It seems that the secular protection of religion is part of a larger cultural trend of protectin irrationality. Bizarre beliefs of all kinds (especially political, psychological) have traditionally enjoyed the protection of Western intellectual culture. There is something frightening to the intelligentsia about science and reason because they seem to limit the range of what can be imagined to be true, and therefore to also limit what can be theorised. The scientific rationality promoted by professor Dawkins is not a threat specifically to religion but to this whole edifice of intellectual life that has shaped our cultural attitudes, including our snobbish aversion to criticisms of religion.

  3. Well, many f the liberals that have it in for Dawkins are SJW, because he, like many decent feminists, won’t stand for the the craziness of the new wave of feminism; and because Elevatorgate. Those two are enough for those liberals to poison his words, even when criccising religion just as they have in the past

  4. Dawkins’criticism of religious misogyny is fine and necessary, but he has two major blind spots with regard to women: first, that western culture still carries on with some of the misogyny that was historically derived from religion, and that the fact that something is worse somewhere else does not mean that we can’t criticize problems here (‘Stop whining about your government persecuting whistleblowers and journalists! Don’t you know they cut people’s heads off for blasphemy in Saudi Arabia?’ To extend his ‘Dear Muslima’ argument). Second, that he (and many atheists) refuses to believe women’s own words about what they experience from atheists and others in the western world (Dawkins: ‘I don’t know that she has been harassed and threatened.’ Female blogger: ‘here are screen caps of some of the harrassment and rape and death threats that I have received.’ Dawkins: ‘I don’t know that she didn’t fabricate all of those rape and death threats.’ To paraphrase a recent Twitter battle.)

    I like about 90% of what he has to say, but apparently that’s not a high enough percentage for the portion of the atheist movement that worship the four horsemen of the New Atheist movement with a level of devotion that mirrors a Catholic congregation’s unflinching devotion to its priest.

  5. I think Sherlock is 100% correct in what he’s written… but… it’s interesting to note that Dawkins himself is a zealous believer in the, climate-Armageddon’s-a-comin’ global warming religion!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s