Dawkins went on to say that one of his former school masters “pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts,” and that to condemn this “mild touching up” as sexual abuse today would somehow be unfair.
“I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today,” he said.
I would say Dawkins is living proof that pedophilia does cause harm.
In the effort to be urbane and nuanced and to see the world in muted shades of gray, guys like Dawkins have no lines at all. But why would he? The lines are blurry because each person has his own set of lines. There are no agreed upon moral truths, there’s simply circumstances that have individual contexts that must be viewed through subjective lenses.
This subjectivity and lack of standards is how society comes unraveled.
“Does anyone else see a pattern here? Perhaps the apostles of the Gospel of Science could examine these correlations, and confirm my impression that there is a distinct non-randomness involved.”
This just in: Man who has spent entire adult public life attempting a Freudian vengeance against God-As-Father-Figure-Betrayer announces that a bit of “mild pedophilia” did “no lasting harm” to his psychology.
This Particular Action Item Has a Pedigree: Via @gogman, this old, and worrisome, article from Der Spiegel, about the Left taking the 60s Revolution too far… right into children, actually.
The Left doesn’t want to discuss this much.