Another Atheist Defends Pedophilia

Peter Tatchell  is a LGBT activist who gave a TED talk back in 2015 about the future of sexuality:

Tatchell basically asks as LGTB acceptance increases, where will this lead us, as a culture, in the future?  That is, as we move  “into a post-homophobic, sexually-enlightened society, where there is acceptance of diversity, what would this mean for the expression of same sex identity and sexuality?”

His basic answer is this – bisexuality and homosexuality will become more common.

He speaks of a survey in Britain that found a greater trend toward sexual experimentation as “homophobic attitudes declined.”  He argues more and more young people are recognizing their capacity for homosexual desire and predicts many more people will have “gay sex and relationships, even perhaps temporarily or experimentally.”

Feel free to watch the video to see him make these points (and more).

Yet there is something troubling about his talk.

For years now, we have been told that the gay and lesbian identity is genetic.  People are born gay and choice has no role to play in such identities.  Yet Tatchell’s entire argument denies this.  He argues that sexual orientation is not preprogrammed at birth and fixed, but is instead malleable. And if greater cultural acceptance of homosexuality will lead to more “gay sex and relationships, even perhaps temporarily or experimentally,” then choice is indeed involved.

But there is something even more troubling.  At 4:40, he talks about a tribal society from Papua New Guinea as an example of how easy it is for the human to switch back and forth between gay and straight states.  Let me quote him about this tribe:

“all young men entered into a same-sex relationship with an older, unmarried warrior as part of their rites of passage into manhood.”The older warrior taught them the skills of hunting and other manly actvities, and that was by-lined with a sexual relationship.  But once completed, those young men ceased to have homosexual contact and went on to marry.  In other words, they went through a phase or period of homosexuality, where they were sexually functional with another male.”

Sorry, but alarm bells went off in my head.  I don’t believe there is some tribe where a bunch of “young men” let the older men have sexual relations with them as part of some training.  That sounds like something that that would happen to boys.

So I did some looking around.  It turns out Tatchell has been admiring this tribe for decades.  Back in 1997, he sent a letter to the The Guardian which sounds awfully familiar:

 ROS Coward (Why Dares to Speak says nothing useful, June 23) thinks it is ‘shocking’ that Gay Men’s Press has published a book, Dares To Speak, which challenges the assumption that all sex involving children and adults is abusive. I think it is courageous.

The distinguished psychologists and anthropologists cited in this book deserve to be heard. Offering a rational, informed perspective on sexual relations between younger and older people, they document examples of societies where consenting inter-generational sex is considered normal, beneficial and enjoyable by old and young alike. Prof Gilbert Herdt points to the Sambia tribe of Papua New Guinea, where all young boys have sex with older warriors as part of their initiation into manhood. Far from being harmed, Prof Herdt says the boys grow up to be happy, well-adjusted husbands and fathers.

The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.

While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.[4]

Tatchell is clearly defending pedophilia.  And note that back in 1997, he clearly states these were “young boys” who had sex with older warriors.  In 2015, Tatchell lies by calling them “young men.”

Thus, it would seem that as Tatchell looks forward to a future where more and more people are “having gay sex and relationships,” that would include relationships between young boys and older men (which he clearly categiorizes as “homosexual”).  After all, he thinks it “courageous” to challenge the assumption that all sex involving children and adults is abusive and there are some child-adult sexual relationships that are quite positive.

So I had to follow up one final hunch and……..what do we have here?

“I am proud to be a supporter of Humanists UK. As an atheist, secularist and humanist I believe that reason, science and ethics – not religious superstition – are the best way to understand the world and promote human rights and welfare. – Peter Tatchell

Surprise.  Yet another apologist for pedophilia is an atheist.

This entry was posted in atheism, pedophiles and tagged , . Bookmark the permalink.

93 Responses to Another Atheist Defends Pedophilia

  1. unclesporkums says:

    And more confirmation that it is all about fornication for them.

  2. Kevin says:

    I’m sorry, a 9 year old?

  3. Michael says:

    I’m sorry, a 9 year old?

    Maybe it’s supposed to be an example of Dawkins’ “mild pedophilia.” But my guess would be that Tatchell is just a liar making this up.

  4. Dhay says:

    > “all young men entered into a same-sex relationship with an older, unmarried warrior as part of their rites of passage into manhood.”
    > Prof Gilbert Herdt points to the Sambia tribe of Papua New Guinea, where all young boys have sex with older warriors as part of their initiation into manhood.

    So far as I can work out from Wiki and from other sources the “older, unmarried warrior” was a slightly older boy; and “have sex” was fellatio — performed not as a hedonistic sex act but as a ritual — by pre-adolescent boys on adolescent boys. On achieving manhood (age 16), the men were expected to marry and to be exclusively heterosexual.

    Penetrative homosexuality doesn’t get a mention.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sambia_people#Traditional_practices_and_beliefs

    > The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures.

    “Initiation rituals thus involve complex homosexual contact from late childhood until marriage, when it stops. Female homosexual activity is believed to be absent”

    http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/anthro/faculty/fiske/135b/sambia.htm

    The Sambia didn’t engage in child-adult sexual relationships.

  5. nsr says:

    When people don’t believe God exists, I find they have a tendency to believe that they can make things true just by wanting it hard enough.

  6. TFBW says:

    Not so much “wanting it hard enough”, but “controlling the narrative”. If you have a social constructivist theory of morality, then you go about imposing your moral tastes through activism of this sort—that is, by talking it into general acceptance.

  7. nsr says:

    Yes, which makes it true, because subjective human opinion and emotion can somehow control reality.

  8. TFBW says:

    If you’re a social constructivist, you think that the Overton Window is morality. In other words, human opinion and emotion don’t control reality, but rather they are reality: morality is group opinion. Mind you, the kind of people who promote this diabolical nonsense never follow it through consistently, or else they’d have to say that slavery was fine when it was socially acceptable. To expect consistency, however, is to make a category error: consistency is a virtue in a philosophical quest for truth; social constructivists have a more Marxist view of things, where everything is a power struggle, and there are no such constraints on achieving dominance. It’s not about right and wrong, but rather winners and losers, so they’re quite happy to make other people impose constraints like “consistency” on themselves: it gives them a tactical edge.

  9. jim- says:

    When people believe God exists, I find they have a tendency to believe that they can make things true just by wanting it hard enough.

  10. nsr says:

    TFBW, do you see it as a regression to animalistic survival of the fittest or is it more complex than that?

  11. Kevin says:

    When people believe God exists, I find they have a tendency to believe that they can make things true just by wanting it hard enough.

    You find nothing of the sort.

    And if that is how you are characterizing prayer, you’re ignorant in addition to dishonest.

  12. TFBW says:

    @nsr, my impression is that the phenomenon is better explained in Biblical rather than Darwinian terms, because it’s not a struggle for survival and reproduction, but rather a battle of wills: an expression of man’s rebellion against God. The ultimate fact which the Social Constructivist resents and fights against is that God has a monopoly on morality; beyond that, it becomes unclear what’s driving what. One might suppose that they have urges (like paedophilia) which they want to justify morally, so they declare morality to be socially constructed to serve that end, but I suspect that it also works in the reverse direction: namely, that they go out of their way to promote anti-Biblical degeneracy as morally acceptable, not because they feel a personal inclination towards it (they may or may not), but as a calculated act of Satanic defiance towards God.

    No doubt the matter lends itself to a much deeper analysis than this, but it will do for a passing comment.

  13. jim- says:

    Happy you brought prayer into the discussion because that’s all it is, a discussion. You see this all the time. Offer up a prayer and wait, concentrate
    on it for a while, aaaand…. nothing. Then spend the next weeks decoding what gods will is because nothing happened which is a sign god has a plan for you, you just don’t know what it is, so you wing it.
    One prayer is enough to convince anyone this whole thing is a scam. That’s where you explainers come in handy. Why don’t you just all join hands and pray the demons of unbelief out of me?
    You were promised tools as a believer. If you can’t raise the dead, heal the sick, make the blind see, then you are an imposter. There are no true believers or the Bible is a lie. Seems like the timeless and eternal truths of the old rag aren’t so timeless after all. They require context to be true, and that in not truth.
    I did find all the unanswered prayers in the Hamilton Path problem in physics-—they’re waiting

  14. John Branyan says:

    Jim, I noticed you didn’t offer your atheistic opinion on the subject of pedophilia. Is there a reason you’re not talking about it?

  15. jim- says:

    It’s an atrocity on children regardless the source. There are sects of Islam that still continue it as a religious practice, like the Bacha Bazi which is well documented. But regardless the source I condemn it outright. No excuses.

  16. John Branyan says:

    Various homosexual advocates point to the animal kingdom. In their minds, male dogs humping each other proves homosexuality is embedded in the chromosomes.

    All occurrences of homosexuality among the beasts are of the kind you just described. The “sex” is domination, not a “loving relationship”. You don’t find same-sex relationships in the animal kingdom, you find rape.

  17. John Branyan says:

    How would you respond to Tatchell?

  18. jim- says:

    Well John, my first thought is open sexuality with children is a form of indoctrination. He’s no better than the fringe religious groups, that exploit their children, really damaging their ability to function outside of the group. I’m sure he detests Christians dragging their children through religion as babies and withholding choice based on that indoctrination. I think it’s important to allow children to be children. I have a nine-year-old daughter who has no clue yet where babies come from, and the other day we watched puppies being born and we had to have a little talk. It actually went very well, but I can imagine had she grown up with his philosophy her innocence and joy of childhood would be simply a bad memory, filled with confusion and pressure unwarranted to impose upon a child.

  19. John Branyan says:

    Your response to Tatchell is to liken Christianity to pedophilia?

  20. jim- says:

    Try reading for content. If that’s the point you want to make, since most pedophiles are Christians, makes perfect sense that the religion that teaches you to hide your personality, but never changes anything, is really the perfect medium to perpetuate the crime. Especially when Christians arrive at a position of authority like the priest. Either way pedophilia is damaging to children, and is much different then children exploring their sexuality on their own time.

  21. John Branyan says:

    Try reading for content. Tatchell is an atheist, not a Christian.

  22. jim- says:

    I had never heard of him till this article, I don’t read any atheism. He must have been a Christian at one point to learn his craft and how to hide it.

  23. John Branyan says:

    LOL! That is fantastic!
    Thanks for the dialogue.

  24. jim- says:

    It’s not really that funny John. It’s the same faith that has allowed you to lie repeatedly for Jesus. Now you think pedophilia is funny —nice work

  25. John Branyan says:

    I don’t think pedophilia is funny. I think YOU are funny.

    Your cynical hypocrisy is obvious to everyone except you and that is comedy. If you’d spend a micro-second in humility before you fire off your anti-theist screeds, it might keep you from looking so foolish.

    I know you don’t believe this, but I’m trying to help you. Thinking is a good thing. Try it once in awhile.

  26. jim- says:

    That from a guy who uses the sandcastle argument.

  27. John Branyan says:

    Yep.
    An argument that’s still stuck in your head years later. You’re moving in the right direction. Keep thinking.

  28. nsr says:

    From a naturalistic perspective I can’t see any obvious arguments for forbidding sex with anyone who has gone through puberty.

  29. jim- says:

    An argument you lost. But only through faith can one handwave so well.
    What’s interesting about that is just a few miles from my house I found some beautiful terraced and uniform sand sculptures a million years in the making. Long before anyone had heard of Yahweh.

  30. John Branyan says:

    What was the sandcastle argument, Jim?

  31. jim- says:

    Sandcastles on the beach, geologic time and evolution vs creation? You asked for naturally occurring sandcastles, but they appear all the time in geologic time. No species evolved in the time it takes to go to the beach. Sound familiar? You then switched to finding a computer on the beach, or something like that which is really evidence for evolution of the human brain.

  32. TFBW says:

    An atheist defends pedophilia. Jim’s response is to attack Christianity. Tribalism at its finest.

  33. John Branyan says:

    That wasn’t the argument.
    The sandcastle on the beach is evidence of intelligence. You switched to naturally occurring formations to avoid admitting what is obvious to my 5 year old granddaughter.

  34. jim- says:

    You asked if sandcastles could appear naturally which they do, so we have to use apples to apples which you fail to comprehend. The granddaughter part was a neat embellishment for you. You want to compare a sandcastle made in an afternoon to naturally occurring geology to specific parameters of intelligence to suit the argument. It a lose lose for you, but consistency isn’t required to make faith statements.

  35. John Branyan says:

    Sandcastles ON THE BEACH do not appear naturally. I never compared sandcastles “made in an afternoon” to naturally occurring geology. Again, that was your evasive tactic.

    Apparently, the idea is still bothering you which means you’re not totally lost. If you win your battle with pride, you might grow up a bit.

  36. jim- says:

    The sandcastle is evidence of human intelligence. Very astute of you. The formations of sandcastles in geologic time is not.

  37. jim- says:

    Faith is simply pride repackaged as a virtue. It is not a virtue, but a conviction of thought without intellect. I’m actually open to any evidence if you ever decide to share any. I have plenty of evidence for some higher cause, it just doesn’t lead to the prepackaged religion you all try to serve as like a turn-key solution to the worlds ills, or to jesus as the creator. There is a lot of evidence, but you continue to appeal where there is none, namely Christianity.
    You’ve all had 2000 years and still achieved nothing.

  38. John Branyan says:

    “I have plenty of evidence for some higher cause…”
    Yet, you remain an atheist. That, my friend is pride.

  39. jim- says:

    Wow. Really? Thanks. If there is some type of continuation it certainly isn’t your god. You have no evidence but cling to your imaginations. That is pride. Atheism may not be the last stop on the track, only an awakening that there are no gods, but is there nothing at all? It isn’t your god running the show, and hat’s why you need faith, because it isn’t real.
    There is a common thread throughout indigenous cultures around the world. They had many, many things in common, while your god was never heard of anywhere. Weird. It took a sword and a conquest for Christianity to thrive. Only the compliant and weak minded survived. Now we are forever saddled with beliefs.

  40. jim- says:

    Firstly, my attack was on pedophilia. Your religion is no better for the excuses every sect has made for this practice, protecting the good name of the churches over the life of a child. Churches are natural breeding grounds for the offending to operate behind piety. If you want to find a pedophile, go to where the children are. You really can’t rust anyone with your kids. Especially bloggers hung up on sex

  41. John Branyan says:

    Thanks for telling me your feelings.

  42. jim- says:

    Since losing faith I just follow the evidence. I don’t have any beliefs, but that doesn’t mean there’s nothing at all, just no gods. That technically makes me an atheist. You know as they break down the atom to the n’th degree, after chipping away the layers upon layers, they find nothing. 99.99999% empty space. Seems physics and Christianity has something in common after all. The study of nothing. Mere words strung out over infinite space, and in the end find nothing. No facts. No enlightenment. No right of passage but forever in bondage to the hormones and neurons through repetition of belief, fused together now so we can argue reason and discovery against your physiology.

  43. John Branyan says:

    Aren’t you also in bondage to hormones and neurons?

  44. jim- says:

    According to the science of belief, it’s mostly a belief thing. Ya know john, when belief is challenged it threatens the validity of hope, is an affront to time wasted in faith, which in turn releases norepinephrine in the brain causing a fight or flight response. Through repetition it hardwires the neurons, hence, the physiology (one reason getting them indoctrinated young is important) On the other hand, I believe nothing and can see the flaws of faith as easily as you can dismantle a catholic, Mormon, or a Jehovah’s Witness, and they can dismantle yours. They’re are in fact all the same as yours (wrong) and your anchoring bias.

  45. John Branyan says:

    Atheism is also hardwired into neurology. Saying you “believe nothing” is itself a statement of belief.

  46. jim- says:

    Nice try. I believe in nothing. You work on your special pleading, I’ll work on my belief. There’s a reason “help my unbelief” is in the Bible. Belief has its own brand of shoehorning virtue out of gullibility, when it is in fact it’s nothing special. The natural man is no enemy to god. The natural man believes just about anything. Especially in a group.

  47. Isaac says:

    “You see this all the time. Offer up a prayer and wait, concentrate
    on it for a while, aaaand…. nothing. Then spend the next weeks decoding what gods will is because nothing happened which is a sign god has a plan for you, you just don’t know what it is, so you wing it.
    One prayer is enough to convince anyone this whole thing is a scam. That’s where you explainers come in handy. Why don’t you just all join hands and pray the demons of unbelief out of me?”

    Wow, Kevin was right.
    This guy really doesn’t even pretend to try and understand what prayer is.

  48. Kevin says:

    This guy really doesn’t even pretend to try and understand what prayer is.

    Apparently praying to God is supposed to be Aladdin with his genie.

  49. TFBW says:

    jim says, “I believe in nothing.”

    And yet you seem to be rather sure that you know something.

  50. Ilíon says:

    Dhay:[summarizing what sense he can make of the Sambia tribe]

    This is some background on excellent Dhay’s summation —

    As is common with primatives, from birth, children are under the exclusive care and control of their mothers. As is also common with primatives, at a certain age (for the Sambia, 7 if I recall correctly), the boys are permanently removed from their mothers’ “weakening influence”, to live communally (as per the Spartans), and I think by age cohort.

    As an important part of the Sambia ushering-into-manhood ritual when the boys are first separated from their mothers, they are forced to consume a ritual food made of the ejaculate of the adult men. And they are taught that boys cannot grow to be men unless they consume the semen of those-who-are-already men; the corollary of which is that the more semen a boy consumes, the stronger and braver a man he will become.

  51. Ilíon says:

    Michael:For years now, we have been told that the gay and lesbian identity is genetic. People are born gay and choice has no role to play in such identities. Yet Tatchell’s entire argument denies this. He argues that sexual orientation is not preprogrammed at birth and fixed, but is instead malleable. And if greater cultural acceptance of homosexuality will lead to more “gay sex and relationships, even perhaps temporarily or experimentally,” then choice is indeed involved.

    The promoters of “The Gay Agenda” have certainly asserted since the 1980s (*) that sexual preference/expression is in-born or genetic, and that neither nurture nor personal choice can alter that in-born inclination — but the assertion was made for political reasons (**): none of them actually believe it.

    (*) In the late 1970s, when I was a Behavioral Sciences major (before switching to Computer Science, as being more rational), the orthodoxy in psychology and sociology was that “sexual desire-and-expression is on a continuum”; that is, that there is no such thing as “sexual orientation”, rather that all persons’ sexual expression is malleable.

    (**) To wit: to convince people that “it is morally wrong to judge homosexual acts to be immoral, for persons who engage in such act have no choice in the matter.”

  52. Ilíon says:

    … excellent Dhay’s summation …

    *gasp*

    Also, on Dhay’s excellent summation.

  53. Ilíon says:

    pedophilia apology:The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.

    I have a (male) relative who was sexually abused during that age range. When we discussed it, he never once said that it “gave [him] great joy”, though he did insist that he was not abused, and that it was a conscious/consensual choice on his part. Oddly enough, as an adult and while he continued to sporadically engage in male-male sexual acts, he was very concerned to protect his step-sons from exposure to such “consensual” choices.

    A few years ago, I employed a young man (*) to help me in building an addition to my house. I eventually learned that when he was 13, his (adult female) babysitter “initiated” him. My question to him (**) seemed to be an eye-opener.

    (*) I mean, young in the sense that I am (just) old enough to be his father.

    (**) Do you think that your behavioral tendencies with regard to sex — which you yourself have told me have ruined your life — might have at least part of their origin in that precocious sexual experience?

  54. Millions of us have been raped by those who call themselves Christians, especially? Christian priests and pastors. And then? You got your leaders who cover up and protect these pedo scum and then? You scum Christians attack the victims while defending the pedophile. So I think you should sthu on your false assertions and suppositions. Cause I know of no atheist who stands up and defends pedophiles….LIKE YOU CHRISTIANS DO ON A DAILY BASIS.

  55. Look at all these Christian pastors and priests busted for being pedophiles.

    http://www.bishop-accountability.org/AbuseTracker/

  56. Kevin says:

    LIKE YOU CHRISTIANS DO ON A DAILY BASIS.

    Either you are claiming that every single one of us CHRISTIANS defend pedophiles on a DAILY BASIS, or you are judging all of us based on the actions of what is undoubtedly an extremely tiny minority of individuals.

    Either way, you can’t be taken seriously.

  57. Michael says:

    Millions of us have been raped by those who call themselves Christians, especially? Christian priests and pastors. And then? You got your leaders who cover up and protect these pedo scum and then? You scum Christians attack the victims while defending the pedophile. So I think you should sthu on your false assertions and suppositions. Cause I know of no atheist who stands up and defends pedophiles….LIKE YOU CHRISTIANS DO ON A DAILY BASIS.

    False assertions and suppositions? I provide evidence in my blog posting and you completely ignore it. The issue is not whether someone is a pedophile, or if others are trying to cover for the individual pedophile. The issue is pedophilia itself (the behavior) and whether someone is trying to normalize it.

    Think of it this way. If a group of men were out there advocating that rape is natural and that rape should be legalized, that itself would be worth noting. We can all agree that rape is wrong. But if there were people trying to normalize it?

  58. Go lie to someone else you ChristoFake.

  59. YOU state that atheists approve of pedophilia. I am calling YOU a freaking liar. I know far too many atheists who are like me, and we want pedophiles? Put to death. Including the hundreds of thousands of Christian priest and pastor pedophiles, Jewish rabbi pedophiles and Muslim cleric pedophiles. Of which? There are far too many to count.

  60. Hey moron. My stuff is all backed up by court reports, police reports and news organization reports as well as files taken directly from all these Christian denominations on their pedophile pimps and pedophiles.

    So what you got to prove your lies about us atheists?

  61. I see you haven’t got the guts to allow my comments with all my links to be posted. I wonder why? Because it proves you are a liar and I am speaking the truth? Yeah, that is it. Because we know how Christians like you? Hate the real truth.

  62. Michael says:

    Go lie to someone else you ChristoFake.

    Quit lying, militant atheist.

  63. Michael says:

    YOU state that atheists approve of pedophilia.

    Wrong. I merely noted that ” Yet another apologist for pedophilia is an atheist.” And the evdence backed me up. That’s why you ignore it.

    I am calling YOU a freaking liar.

    So what? It does not surprise me that a miltant atheist who ignores my argument/evidence would now turn to launching an ad hominem attack.

  64. Michael says:

    So what you got to prove your lies about us atheists?

    I have told no lies. And you continue to ignore my evidence.

  65. Michael says:

    I see you haven’t got the guts to allow my comments with all my links to be posted. I wonder why? Because it proves you are a liar and I am speaking the truth? Yeah, that is it. Because we know how Christians like you? Hate the real truth.

    LOL! You ignore my arguments/evidence and then engage in several ad hominem attacks. Now you feel entitled to all kinds of links to your blog. First day here and you have tried to post over a dozen link-heavy comments. I think most others here would agree that it was wise of me to keep your comments in moderation.

  66. Ilíon says:

    Michael:Quit lying, militant atheist.

    As a practical matter, that’s really no different from saying, “Quit breathing, militant atheist.

  67. Ilíon says:

    One thing I’ve long noticed is that for all their vituperation, militant atheists tend to be woefully under-armed. Some military.

  68. Dhay says:

    atheistmilitantsrising > … You scum Christians attack the victims …

    That’s an astonishing assertion: I’ve totally missed spotting anywhere on this blog where either the blogger (Michael) or any of his responders has attacked victims of pedophilia; there’s been no attack by anyone here on any specific victim of pedophilia, nor any attack on victims of pedophilia in general. If you wish to continue to claim otherwise, please back up your claim by quoting the relevant passages.

    > … while defending the pedophile. …

    Again, nobody here has done that: Michael and his responders have consistently attacked advocates of pedophilia, from Peter Tatchell — you did read the OP, did you, did you? — through to that defender of “mild pedophilia”, Richard Dawkins. As regards attacking practitioners of pedophilia, Michael has recently attacked the pedophile Jeffrey Epstein, I the Tibetan Buddhist guru Sakyong Mipham Rinpoche. If you wish to continue to claim S2L defends pedophiles, please do back up your claim by quoting the relevant passages.

    > So I think you should s[hut] t[he] h[eck] u[p] on your false assertions and suppositions. Cause I know of no atheist who stands up and defends pedophiles… …

    Yes you do: you surely know of the atheist, Richard Dawkins, who has defended “mild pedophilia”; you know from the OP of the atheist, Peter Tatchell, who advocates for pedophilia and for normalising it; in your 22 February 2020 blog post entitled “Intellectual Elites Who Embraced Pedophilia” you link to Michael’s 08 January OP of the same name, so plainly you do know that the atheists in that French intellectual elite group identified were very actively and very openly pedophiles.

    > YOU state that atheists approve of pedophilia.

    Again, nobody — not Michael, not responders — has claimed that all atheists approve of pedophilia. If you wish to continue to claim otherwise — on this one point and/or those above — please demonstrate you are rational by backing up your claims, quoting the relevant passages.

    *

    > … You scum Christians…

    If you are on a rant targeting supporters of pedophilia you’ve missed your target; nobody here supports pedophilia, nor ever has: we attack supporters of pedophilia. Please re-read the OP and responses.

  69. YOUR own fucking words of three of your blog postings YOU try to equate us atheists as approvers of PEDOPHILES you scumbag pos. YOU equate us atheists as pedophiles you low life scumbag. And I have proven? NO WE ATHEISTS? DO NOT APPROVE OF PEDOPHILES, BUT YOU CHRISTIANS SURE THE HELL DO. WITH TENS OF THOUSANDS OF PEDOPHILE PRIESTS AND PASTORS TO BACK UP MY ASSERTIONS, AND FAR TOO MANY REPORTS OF THE LEADERS OF ALL THESE DENOMINATIONS PROTECTING THEIR PEDOPHILES OVER THE CHILDREN.

    So? If it is ANYONE who defends pedophiles? It is you disgusting Christians and here is just a couple of examples to back up my statements.

    They KNEW about this Episcopal Priest and his predilictions and did not care. They allowed him to become a priest which means? They approved of his pedophilia.

    PORTAGE, WI. – Episcopal Church officials here and in Ft. Worth, Texas, allowed a now-imprisoned man to become a priest despite accusations of sexual misconduct during his seminary training, police records show. Defrocked priest Eugene Maxey, 43, now serving 20 years in Wisconsin, admitted to police that he abused four boys at Nashotah House, a Wisconsin seminary, in the late 1980s, some of them dozens of times. He denied sexually molesting a young man there whom he had driven up with from Texas and gotten drunk, saying it was consensual. No charges were filed in that incident nor in regards to his confession to police of abusing boys in Albany, New York, after ordination. Maxey served there until the early 1990s and then worked at parish in Chester, England, until his arrest.

    Signs of trouble first surfaced by early 1986, when a fellow seminarian told the dean that she suspected Maxey of trying to seduce her 12-year-old son. Police records show that men who lived in the dormitory with Maxey backed up her claims, saying boys often visited him behind closed doors.

    The dean at the time, Fr. Jack Knight, said it was only “innuendo” and Maxey denied wrongdoing. Knight is himself now suspended from the priesthood for sexual misconduct with a Colorado woman.

    After more allegations were made, Maxey was allowed to transfer his allegiance to the Albany diocese. Fr. Rex Perry, who worked at the seminary and served as mediator, resigned last year as a pastor in Dallas after pleading no contest to fondling a Dallas police officer in a public restroom. Since completing a probationary sentence, he is now an assistant pastor in Baton Rouge.

    Several people interviewed by police at Nashotah House, one of the most conservative Episcopal seminaries in the country, said that at the time consensual adult misconduct was common there, describing heterosexual adultery, homosexual promiscuity and faculty-student liaisons.

    Five prosecutions resulted from the investigation. Along with Maxey, Fr. Russell Martin, 39, also sponsored by the Ft. Worth diocese and now suspended, was convicted for three incidents of child-abuse, and is serving a four-year term which he is appealing.

    Along with another seminarian, courts found they abused a young teenage boy whose stepfather was studying for the priesthood at the seminary at that time. The victim came forward in early 1994 with allegations of everything from fondling to rape, sometimes accompanied by pornography and drug use. This led to the identification of other victims of Maxey, most of whom were also sons of fellow seminarians. (10/5/97)

    Look at them defending and standing up for this pedophile priest.

    PARISH SUPPORTS PORTLAND PREYING PASTOR. Prominent pastor Rev. Willie B. Smith, 64, former president of Ecumenical Ministries of Oregon, is accused of sexually abusing 3 teenage girls at First African Methodist Episcopal Zion Church. He was charged with 11 counts of 1st degree sexual abuse, a felony, and 1 count of 3rd degree sexual abuse, a misdemeanor. Pastors in the community werequick to speak about his “exemplary” work. Two of the victims told police Smith had cornered them in his church office and groped them. A third said she was repeatedly abused by Smith for 16 months, beginning in September 1990. The victims were 12, 13, and 17 at the time of the incidents. Almost every parishioner lined up to hug, kiss and reassure Smith following the arrest. Source: _Oregonian_ 3/13,15/93.

    Another example of Christians protecting and defending their pedophiles

    1988: Church of England Vicar Michael Walter, already having served time for indecently assaulting little boys yet allowed to continue his clerical career by the church, is found guilty of further assaults on children. Winchester, England. 2 Anglican vicars, a choirmaster, a solicitor and an already convicted child molester all jailed at Winchester Crown Court on 21 specimen charges of sexual abuse of boys as young as seven which were carried out on them at church outings, at the YMCA and in churchyards. The men made the children take an oath never to breathe a word of what was going on and paid them 1.00 for each session. Sometimes the children’s private parts were beaten with a fly swatter.

    Again, the leadership KNEW about this pedo priests problems and did nothing to stop it, thereby approving and defending another pedophile.

    Priest Rev. Francis Papworth, rector of the Santa Rosa Episcopal Church of the Incarnation, was sentenced to seven years for molesting several teenagers at his Windsor home. A $120 million lawsuit was filed against the Northern California Diocese of the Episcopal Church, claiming church leaders knew of Papworth’s problems but failed to take action.

    Now? I could continue to do this all damn day, with tens of thousands of more postings, all showing how Christian priests and pastors were protected by the leadership of their denominations, and praised by the pew polishers and defended by them. Which goes to show? Christians do in fact? Not only approve of their pedophile priests and pastors, but defend and protect them at all costs over their victims.

  70. You have no evidence you lying asshole. But I have posted much evidence to prove what I have said. So suck it up and deal with it. As far as I am concerned there Mickey??? All Christian Pedophile Pimps who in fact? Not only defended these perverted pedophiles, but protected them, moved them from parish to parish to rape even more innocent children? And? All those digusting, degenerate hundreds of thousands of predatory Christian priests, brothers, pastors, nuns, sisters and laymen busted for raping children? Should all face the death penalty using the Christian Inquisitional Tools, starting with the Rat Torture. We strip them, bind them to a table, place a starving rat on their crotches, place a cage over the rat and a bowl of coals on top and let the rat eat their junk. They will never rape another child again now will they? And then as a final executory act? We draw and quarter them, put their damn heads on pikes in front of the churches with the warning, this is what we do to Christians religious leader scumbags who protect pedophiles and their pedophiles.

    How you like them for apples?

  71. Go fuck yourself. YOU are a typical piece of shit Christian. YOU cannot handle the fucking truth and you are a pathological liar plain and simple. And? I fucking hate ChristoFascist pig fucking Taliban purveyors of lies and hate against us atheists. People like youy? Should be taken out cause it is by your spreading of lies and hate against us atheists? That causes psychopathic Christians and Muslims to murder us. And as you Christians sow? So should you all fucking reap. As you have done unto Pagans, Native Americans, Jews, lgbts and many others? The fucking same should be done unto all you Christians.

    Christians like YOU and your psycho followers here? Are the reason why? You Christians are so fucking hated. YOU spread hate, you spread lies and then wonder why you are oh so hated? Well look in the fucking mirror you ChristoTaliban piece of shit liar.

    And yeah, you are a punk assed pussy, cause you havent got the balls to allow my posting out that proves I was speaking the truth while YOU were speaking nothing but lies. But that is typical of fake assed Christians like yourself. So do the world a favor you low life piece of shit. Shoot yourself cause you are in fact? A waste of humanity.

  72. YOU kept my comment in hiding because it speaks the truth. It brings you to over a dozen websites, of truth and facts about your disgusting Pedophile Pimps and Pedophiles of your cult called Christianity. It proves that it is in fact? Christians who support and defend your pedophiles, while you scumbags attack the victims and harm them even further.

    Yeah, you are just a little CUNT of a Christian, who spews hate and lies about us atheists and cannot handle it when an athiest kicks your fucking mooley ass and proves you a liar and proves himself a truth teller. Something most of you Cunt of a christians like yourself? Cannot handle.

  73. Go back and hide in your pathological liars closet you ChristoFuckstain shithead. It is psychotic, pathological lying Christians like you? Who give other Christians a bad name.

  74. Michael says:

    YOUR own fucking words of three of your blog postings YOU try to equate us atheists as approvers of PEDOPHILES you scumbag pos.

    No, I do not equate atheists as approvers of pedophiles. I’m noticing that people who would like society to normalize pedophilia tend to be atheists. Of course, that does not mean all, or even most, atheists would agree.

    In the blog post above that you have ignored, someone wrote:

    The positive nature of some child-adult sexual relationships is not confined to non-Western cultures. Several of my friends – gay and straight, male and female – had sex with adults from the ages of nine to 13. None feel they were abused. All say it was their conscious choice and gave them great joy.

    While it may be impossible to condone paedophilia, it is time society acknowledged the truth that not all sex involving children is unwanted, abusive and harmful.

    Was the person who wrote that an atheist or theist?

    Or consider this quote:

    First, just because some pedophile assaults are violent and painful, it doesn’t mean that all are. A child too young to notice what is happening at the hands of a gentle pedophile will have no difficulty at all in noticing the pain inflicted by a violent one. Phrases like ‘predatory monster’ are not discriminating enough, and are framed in the light of adult hang-ups.

    Was the person who wrote that an atheist or theist?

    Or, consider this quote:

    “I am skeptical of the claim that voluntarily pedophilia harms children. The arguments that it causes harm seem to be based on cases which aren’t voluntary, which are then stretched by parents who are horrified by the idea that their little baby is maturing.”

    Was the person who wrote that an atheist or theist?

    Now? I could continue to do this all damn day, with tens of thousands of more postings, all showing how Christian priests and pastors were protected by the leadership of their denominations, and praised by the pew polishers and defended by them. Which goes to show? Christians do in fact? Not only approve of their pedophile priests and pastors, but defend and protect them at all costs over their victims.

    And I could do the same thing when it comes to teachers:
    https://shadowtolight.wordpress.com/2017/06/16/hey-teacher-leave-them-kids-alone/

    But you are missing the point. In none of your examples will we find Church leaders or “pew polishers” arguing that our culture needs to recognize that not all expressions of pedophilia are bad. The Church leaders or “pew polishers” may try to protect “one of their own” – the priests and pastors, but not by insisting pedophilia is not wrong. You need to find examples of Church leaders or “pew polishers” who want to change how our culture views pedophilia in a welcoming manner.

  75. Michael says:

    YOU kept my comment in hiding because it speaks the truth. It brings you to over a dozen websites, of truth and facts about your disgusting Pedophile Pimps and Pedophiles of your cult called Christianity. It proves that it is in fact? Christians who support and defend your pedophiles, while you scumbags attack the victims and harm them even further.

    Yeah, you are just a little CUNT of a Christian, who spews hate and lies about us atheists and cannot handle it when an athiest kicks your fucking mooley ass and proves you a liar and proves himself a truth teller. Something most of you Cunt of a christians like yourself? Cannot handle.

    You seem agitated. Tell ya what. You want me to link to your blog(s)? Okay, provide the link to your blog posting where you condemn atheist Richard Dawkins for his views about “mild pedophilia.”

  76. Michael says:

    And? I fucking hate ChristoFascist pig fucking Taliban purveyors of lies and hate against us atheists. People like youy? Should be taken out cause it is by your spreading of lies and hate against us atheists? That causes psychopathic Christians and Muslims to murder us.

    People like me should be “taken out?” My. I have had atheists make death threats against me in the past, but never as a public comment. Militant atheism indeed.

  77. Do the world a favor, you lying sack of shit fake assed ChristoTaliban cunt. Take a gun, shove it up your fucking ass, and blow your useless brains out. Oh and guess what you ChristoCunt? YOU got no clue as to the kind of atheist I am, cause I am sick and tired of all you psychotic ChristoCunts and MuzzieCunts who believe you got a fucking right to judge who is worthy of being put to death by brutal murders by you ChristoCunts and MuzzieCunts. and you want to know what?

    Each time I read a story of where a whole bunch of you Christians are slaughtered by Muslims? I laugh and praise your god, for it seems? After all the people you Christians brutally slaughtered in your ChristoFascist bullshit? You truly are reaping all the hate, all the bigotry, all the misogyny, all the death you Christians have sown upon others and finally having done unto you as you all did to Pagans, us Native Americans, to Africans and many others you ChristoTaliban Cunts of the World slaughtered in your forced conversion programs.

    I actually throw a party each time I read a story of a bunch of Christians being butchered in a church, shot down like the rabid dogs they are by some other Christian psycho. That makes me laugh. Where the fuck is your god then hun? Yeah, apparently your god is too busy jerking off to all the live kiddy porn going on with your tens of thousands of Christian priests and pastors raping kids. Oh and asshole, the majority of teachers who are also raping kids? 75% of them? Are teachers in Christian schools, the rest? Are teachers who mostly proclaim themselves Christians. So suck on that shit you ChristoCunt hypocrite piece of shit.

    YOU Christians? Deserve to reap back all you have sown and have done unto you all? As you did to Pagans, Native Americans, Africans and to atheists, lgbts, scientists and many others. And you all fucking deserve it.

  78. Yeah, I think all Christians should reap back all the things all Christians have done unto others to learn their lessons. I think that Christians should be wiped off the face of the earth, just like they tried to do to all my Native American ancestors in their mass genocide against us.

    I think Christians should be tortured, just like the Christians tortured others during their Inquisitional periods.

    I think that Jews should be able to wipe out whole towns of Christians, just like Christians wiped out whole towns of Jews during their Crusades and during the Black Death and other periods. Oh and Christians should be put in concentration death camps, like Hitler’s Positive Christian Nazis did to the Jews and others and just like your ChristoTaliban ancestors did to us Native Americans.

    Yes, I fully believe? That Christians should in fact? Reap back all the hate, all the bigotry, all the misogyny, all the terror, all the death and foul murder, all the tortures, and all the persecutions along with all the mass genocides and all the wars they have brought upon the human race for 1,700 years now, and have done unto them? As they have done unto others.And you Christians proclaimed your religion was one of love, peace, non-judgment, mercy and high morals? Yeah fucking right.

  79. Michael says:

    Do the world a favor, you lying sack of shit fake assed ChristoTaliban cunt. Take a gun, shove it up your fucking ass, and blow your useless brains out. Oh and guess what you ChristoCunt? YOU got no clue as to the kind of atheist I am

    Yes, I have more than a clue. I have your words. You are a militant atheist who thinks “Christians should be tortured,” “Christians should be put in concentration death camps,” and “Christians should be wiped off the face of the earth.” You make death threats and are clearly consumed by your pure, raw hatred of Christians.

    Look, I’ll turn the other cheek and allow you the last word. Good bye, miltant atheist. Thanks for showing atheists like you exist.

    Oh, one more tiny thing – you never did have a criticism of Richard Dawkin’s notions of “mild pedophilia,” did you?

  80. unclesporkums says:

    What a psycho.

  81. unclesporkums says:

    So, Mike, will your next article be “The Science and Reasoning of Death Threats”?

  82. Ilíon says:

    What a psycho.

    As everyone knows — for have not prominent anti-theists so informed us for years? — Christ-haters (and Christian-haters) such as “atheistmilitantsrising” are enabled by the “moderate” God-deniers.

  83. Kevin says:

    Rarely have I encountered someone that deranged online, and thankfully never in person.

    Ironically, every time I have, they have been an atheist or progressive, usually both. Makes you wonder.

  84. Ilíon says:

    Both God-denial and “progressivism” and maintained initially by lying to oneself, and ultimately by divorcing oneself from rationality and reality.

  85. grodrigues says:

    Woa, I have seen my share of weirdos on the internet, but such a foul-mouthed, hate-consumed, deranged lunatic? First time. Not a pretty sight.

    The man needs prayers, not arguments.

  86. nsr says:

    A timely reminder that atheism has no mechanism or teaching that can convert hate into forgiveness and love.

  87. Go fuck yourself Michael. All you fucking ChristoCunt liars like yourself? Should in fact? Be put to death. Matter of fact? All of your twisted fellow ChristoCunts on your blog? Also all deserve to be put to death. How the fuck you like those for apples? I guess you ChristoCunts truly do not like reaping back all the hate and evil and murder you all have done to us atheists huh? Well hang on you ChristoCunts…you and your fellow MuzzieCunt haters? Are all about to reap all the hate and death you Cunts have sown against us atheists. For as you Cunts have sown against us? So the fuck you all shall reap.

    And yeah, I fucking hate you Christians, cause you Christians? Are great teachers of hate, bigotry and evil. So again? As you Cunt Assed Christians have sown? So shall you fucking ChristoCunts reap.

    And that is taken directly from your buybull.

  88. Michael says:

    It looks like atheistmilitant is still sharing the atheist love. But it also looks like someone spotted him as a troll (and a poe):

    https://veritasdomain.wordpress.com/2020/02/27/partial-arts-and-a-hate-bait/

  89. Ilíon says:

    Well, in his defense, *most* internet ‘atheists’ are ‘trolls’ … and a not insignificant portion of them practice ‘poetry’

  90. Kevin says:

    A mere handful of atheists are responsible for more deaths than every Christian combined. And the vast majority of deaths throughout history have been for non-religious reasons, even by Christians.

    Looks like, if we are responsible for the entirety of our “groups” throughout history, then us ChristoCunts are morally superior to atheistmilitantrising by his own standards.

  91. nsr says:

    What a sad case. It doesn’t take much for an angry atheist to show his true colours.

  92. TFBW says:

    When someone’s comments are that badly unhinged, I don’t see any point in engaging with them, or even passing comment on them. I see two possibilities: either someone is play-acting a nutjob, or they’re actually mentally ill. In the former case, they’re just trolling, and this tells us nothing except that trolls exist (like we don’t know that already). Their actual stance on atheism is in no way revealed by or even related to this fact, as some trolls just do it for its own sake. In the latter case, I really don’t think that there’s any productive way to deal with the mentally ill in an online environment, particularly given that actual expertise in dealing with it is rare.

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 )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google 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 )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.