Richard Dawkins really needs to get out of his intellectually inbred cocoon. He’s been on this 10+ year mission to get people to stop referring to children as “Christian children” or “Muslim children.” He is stuck on this crazypants notion that such labels are “child abuse,” although he backs away from using the term “child abuse” in his latest rant.
Consider this gem:
Would you ever speak of a four-year-old’s political beliefs? Hannah is a socialist four-year-old, Mark a conservative. Who would ever dream of saying such a thing? What would you say if you read a demographic article which said something like this: “One in every three children born today is a Kantian Neo-platonist child. If the birth rate trends continue, Existentialist Positivists will be outnumbered by 2030.” Never mind the nonsensical names of philosophical schools of thought I just invented. I deliberately chose surreal names so as not to distract from the real point. Religion is the one exception we all make to the rule: don’t label children with the opinions of their parents.
And if you want to make an exception for the opinions we call religious, and claim that it is any less preposterous to speak of “Christian children” or “Muslim children”, you’d better have a good argument up your sleeve.
My good argument simply notes that once again, Dawkins is making claims without evidence. In fact, he is making claims that run contrary to the evidence. What claim? Religion is the one exception we all make to the rule. What evidence?
Well, let’s start with this web page – I’m raising my kids atheist in a God-obsessed culture: How I learned to parent godless children.
My favorite is this one, because it is hosted on a site called richarddawkins.net!
Why is it so easy to refute Richard Dawkins?