Mark Schierbecker, from The College Fix, does some reporting about Richard Carrier being accused of sexual harassment in an article entitled, “Popularizer of social-justice atheism can’t believe he’s accused of sexually harassing students.” He includes some more details of Richard Carrier’s secular values:
In a Facebook post June 15 that was removed right before this story’s publication, the former president of the Arizona State University chapter of the alliance, Amy Frank, said that Carrier “sexually harassed me and touched me a year ago after speaking at ASU.”
Without being told who accused him, Carrier thought the alliance was referring to another woman he had expressed interest in at another event. He had deemed his behavior toward that woman as morally reprehensible, whereas his interaction with Frank was not “at all bad,” he wrote.
As a result he didn’t immediately defend himself from the allegations, telling the alliance he “thought the interest was mutual and I was very wrong” and wouldn’t do it again. Instead he offered to come clean about the encounter on his blog.
It is interesting to watch the atheist polyamorist get confused about what he said or did to whom. Y’see, he only behaved “morally reprehensible” with that woman, not this woman.
Only months later did Carrier learn that the complaint came from Frank, he said.
“I have not decided yet whether to sue Frank,” Carrier told The Fix in a followup email Thursday. “She appears to be troubled and may be a victim of mental illness.”
So Carrier, the champion of feminism, is trying to plant the idea that a woman, who has said she was sexually harassed, is actually mentally ill.
Yet the same Richard Carrier once said, ” You can find plenty to read now online about the disproportionate way that even in our own American society women are harassed or assaulted, or regarded as liars, or their thoughts or concerns ignored.”
So what are we supposed to do?
According to the 2014 version of Richard Carrier, we should believe Amy Frank, otherwise we participate in the “sexist abuse and mistreatment of women throughout our social system.” Yet according to the 2016 version of Richard Carrier, we are to ignore Amy Frank’s concerns as those of someone who is troubled and mentally ill.
All of this underscores atheism’s problem with morality. For years, Richard Carrier has made it clear he has a strong moral code – the moral code of Feminism. He has articulated and defended this moral code with thousands of passionate words. He has done this for years. He has used his moral code to pass judgment on many other people, even to the point of defending the accusation that a leading skeptic in his own movement was a rapist. So yes, Richard Carrier has a moral code. It has served him well to become something of a leader in the his small corner of the secular movement.
But when it came time to adhere to his moral code when it no longer benefited him to do so, suddenly, in an instant, the lofty moral code, with its thousands of words of support, was no longer important. For now, it is the Reputation of Richard Carrier that takes precedence. Even if he has to sue.
So Richard Carrier, champion of atheism, helps illustrate atheism’s problem with morality. Yes, he has a moral code. It’s just that you only adhere to the moral code when it suits you. Why? Because ultimately, there is no reason to adhere to the moral code. Unless it suits you.