Sunday, April 11, 2021   

  Home     About     Guest Editorials     Advertise     Blog     Site Map     Links     Contact      Subscribe RSS      Subscribe Email  
Home » General

Let the fate of Richard Dawkins be a lesson to you all – Twitter brings out the worst in humankind

16 March 2014 General 25 Comments Email This Post Email This Post


By   (Telegraph)

Another week, another half-hilarious, half-tragic Richard Dawkins meltdown on Twitter. This time, Dawkins, who prior to becoming a jester of the Twittersphere was apparently a well respected author, used the opportunity of International Women’s Day to blast the “loathsome religion” of Islam. He tweeted a photo of three Afghani women in short skirts in the 1970s next to a photo of three Afghani women cloaked in the burqa today, alongside the words: “How can anyone defend this loathsome religion?” He means Islam. He always means Islam. He has a real problem with Islam, even more than he does with Catholicism, whose teachings he once described as being worse than rape.

His “loathsome religion” tweet was hotly followed by another suggesting that the ritual slaughter of animals for faith reasons – ie halal and kosher – should be banned. “Many complex considerations should influence our treatment of animals. ‘Sincerely held religious beliefs’ are not among them,” he said. He followed this up with yet another shouty tweet, saying: “‘Beliefs’? BELIEFS!” It seems he doesn’t like belief. Or the idea that society should allow people to hold and act on beliefs that run counter to what the rest of us consider to be normal and decent. Which is weird, considering that the entire Enlightenment – to which Dawkins claims to be an adherent – began from a conviction that men must be free to worship as they see fit, regardless of whether their ideas or behaviour offend the majority. In the words of John Locke, in his 1689 Letter Concerning Toleration, how terrible would it be to put men “under the necessity to quit the light of their own reason, and oppose the dictates of their own consciences, and blindly to resign themselves up to the will of their governors”. Tweet that, Rich.

Dawkins is forever landing himself in hot water over his tweets. He’s tweeted about how few Nobel Prizes Muslims have won, followed by a barb disguised as a compliment: “They did great things in the Middle Ages, though.” He’s tweeted his bamboozlement as to why the New Statesman employed a practising Muslim as its political editor. His tweets are generously peppered with exclamation marks and CAPITAL LETTERS and hectoring phraseology, making it pretty clear that we are getting a glimpse into his unedited thoughts, into the inner recesses of his mind, into that part of the human brain that has always existed – the bovine, often prejudiced bit – but which until recent times was not given public expression. We are seeing how Dawkins’s mind works prior to his exercise of thought and self-editing, and it isn’t pretty.

Continue reading…

Original post: Let the fate of Richard Dawkins be a lesson to you all – Twitter brings out the worst in humankind


  1. There’s a nice warm place in Jahannam for him 🙂

  2. Spending a trillion dollars training the Mujahideen; funding the Taliban; funding warlords/drug lords; occupying/slaughtering/contaminating their land for decades to come is clearly the example of superior morality we wonderful Westerners have showed those “loathsome” people of Afghanistan..

    People like him are an embarrassment to atheists like myself. Spreading hatred like this contributes nothing but brutal hypocrisy.

  3. Even his atheism is full of religion. He’s a contradiction; a scientist best kept to his science. All science, like religion, relies on poetry to explain its ideas. Why can’t he see that?

  4. I’m not worried about him. Like many people, he equates short skirts with “freedom”. Yes, the Taliban’s imposition of the burqa on Afghan women was heinous – however, people commonly have the same opinion of women who choose to wear hijab or niqab of their own free will. Just because something is different from your experience doesn’t make it “oppressive”. I’m thinking he’s just mad because he can’t look at a covered Muslim woman’s legs. Dude, newsflash: my hijab frees me from the roaming eyes of men like you.

    If he’s also concerned about ritual slaughter (halal or kosher) of animals, then I hope he’s vegan – because the American meat, poultry, and dairy industry is wasteful, cruel, and environmentally unsustainable – and the cherry on top is that this industry poisons us in the name of higher production and profit.

  5. I’m a vegan Muslim in hijab. I think he and I should talk lol… I’ve only got 3 degrees though 😉

  6. Sad, this guy needs help!

  7. Lol wa alaikum salaam! Are you gluten free too? Teehee

  8. His brand of atheism and fundamentalist religions have something in common: they see religion, and the world, in a literal, black-and-white way. This inevitably leads to intolerance.

  9. I’m glad he has such a firm grip on the depth and breadth of Afghan women’s dress of the late 20th century.

  10. The fundie Christians and the militant atheists ought to get together and go bowling, so often do they have the knife out for Muslims. Dawkins and Sam Harris could take on Pat Robertson and Terry “Rev. Yosemite Sam” Jones in a few strings, I think. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again – belief in the Divine, however you understand it to be, does NOT automatically make you an idiot to be abused. Dawkins is an embarrassment to atheism – he really needs to STFU.

  11. Why do we care what this man thinks? His words will not stop Muslims from being Muslim and Islam being Islam. And growing. Sorry, sir. May Allah unseal his heart.

  12. How do you justify making women second class citizens, not allowing them to vote, drive, and all the other rules that a designed to subjugate them to men?

  13. Did he mention that the latter kind of Islam (mujahedin) was supported by the USA? I mean I love Dawkins but he needs a broader perspective though I certainly don’t approve of such wahhabism/salafism

  14. It’s not just those two countries and you know it. When you use the name of your god to justify I’m moral treatment yes it is equated to your religion. Christians used it for slavery.

  15. If Dawkins was smart – he would have dropped his bigotry about all of Islam and went after the people of Afghanistan who allowed their country to get influenced by the Saudi-backed Wahhabi cult of Doom and backwardness….

  16. Dawkins is a dick of the highest order.

  17. Seems like M. Dawkins became like his gene, a selfish entity. And I still try to understand how many people liked his book, it is so pompous and antinomic of the creativity and the excitement of such discipline (evolution is a very interesting concept on how Nature perfected our little mechanics)….

  18. if the CIA and their stooges didn’t screw around in Afghanistan in the 80s, Afghanistan would be a secular state like the other Central Asian former Soviet Republics, Dawkins is a stupid neo-con hypocrite

  19. Wow. Much people, awesome philosophy. LOL

  20. Dawkins is an ass. it’s the core of who he is –

  21. funny how you mention gender inequality in the west but ignore its inbuilt existence in Islam lol

  22. @Ian, that’s not context
    For the verse I posted. The Context would be ayats 17-20.

  23. @ian, even if that were it still proves nothing. That actually says the opposite of what you claim it’s proof of.

  24. There are millions of Muslim women in the USA. If they were all being beaten up, discriminated, etc… As you claim women in islam are, the media would be all
    Over that shit. Especially Fox News! So i’m not buyin your bullshit lies!!!

  25. There are millions of Muslim women in the USA. If they were all being beaten up, discriminated, etc… As you claim women in islam are, the media would be all
    Over that shit. Especially Fox News! So i’m not buyin your bullshit lies!!!

Have your say!

Add your comment below, or trackback from your own site. You can also subscribe to these comments via RSS.

Be nice. Keep it clean. Stay on topic. No spam.

You can use these tags:
<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>