Richard Dawkins was stripped of his "Humanist of the year award" given to him in the 90s, because he dared post this on twitter: “In 2015, Rachel Dolezal, a white chapter president of NAACP, was vilified for identifying as Black,” wrote Dawkins on Twitter. “Some men choose to identify as women, and some women choose to identify as men. You will be vilified if you deny that they literally are what they identify as. Discuss.” https://www.forbes.com/sites/robert...o-demean-marginalized-groups/?sh=4c466bdb1224
This is pretty messed up and doesn't bode well for "Humanism". Personally, I, an atheist, have never identified as humanist and I'm happy for that now. I think this overwoke "cancellation" does more to hurt the name of humanism than the name of Dawkins.
So, 'damn him' for brining up how the movement has changed since 2015? I'm just asking if I've correctly identified the purpose of the OP. I've likened myself to a 'Christian Humanist', being that while I believe Jesus came to save our souls, I also agree that our prime focus should be on humanity rather than divine or supernatural matters. We should stress the potential value and goodness of human beings, emphasize common human needs, and seek rational ways of solving human problems. So I'm interested in this subject, but I'm not sure I follow how this particular incidence applies to humanism (or atheism, for that matter).
It doesn't. Not at all. It is just another example of woke cancel culture infecting yet another organization. It isn't the first and won't be the last. Nothing whatsoever to do with actual humanism and not anything to do with atheism (wokeness is actually a newly emerging religion it would seem).
Just confirms that atheism by itself is not a religion or that no one should assume any two atheists have the same opinion on anything other than a lack of god/s.
Atheism most certainly has its different denominations...like any religion. And like any religious people...not everyone has exactly the same political opinion. The question is....how many Atheists will stand with Richard Dawkins. Will anybody....atheist, Christian, Muslim confront this and push back? This type of intimidation by the Woke movement can only be stopped by courageous people to stand by those persecuted for expressing truth and commensense.
Oh do tell, what do other "denominations" of atheism say that is different about lack of belief in god? Well, I you see I have been standing up against the woke culture since Mary Whitehouse and her National Viewers and Listeners Association tried to dictate what I could and could not watch on the telly.
Well I hope you have the zeal and courage to stand with Richard Dawkins. It won't be as easy as standing against a conservative. You will feel very alone.
Kind of 2 discussions here. 1) What do you think of Trans and 2) Is what happened to Dawkins for positing a question OK or not. 2 is easy. Of course not. This is a culture that increasingly pushes for putting people in prison for wrong think. See last nights Tucker Carlson for more. 1? I want to be respectful of OTS and not intentionally do or say insensitive things. But I won't be obsequious. I won't start calling a dog's tail a leg and vilify anyone that still says dogs have 4 legs rather than 5. Mostly given the push back we're seeing from TERFs, expect this to be the default position of conscientious people.
I think it confirms closer to the opposite. Back in the day I consumed a lot of "Humanist" material but it was all about free inquiry in those days. It looks like a dogma has formed since then and it's being protected...religiously.
Yes. I agree. I have been atheist and somewhat humanist all my life, and decades ago wouldn't have resisted that label. Now I would, because it seems to have morphed into an irrational and authoritarian quasi-religion.
Dawkins is from a family of slavers and still owns the plush estate his family gained from torture and race based slavery. He can burn in hell for eternity yah willing.
I bet you that if you looked into your own family history at some point some ancestor did something heinous and so your ancestor survived and procreated and so you exist. Should you burn in hell for eternity yah willing?
If they did they couldn't have been very good (evil) since I'm not residing in a mansion like Dawkins the slave master is
How easily the modern Progressive Left pushes their own off a cliff. Remember when "Caitlyn" Jenner was touted as "brave and beautiful", until it came out that he/she identified as a Republican? Or the fiasco J.K. Rowling got into for her simple comments about the transgender thing putting women's rights in jeopardy? They nearly tried to cancel the Harry Potter franchise she had written.
I think you need to be careful about generalizing any of that to the random liberal minded person. These are the crazies and not the normies, just like conservatives aren't all white supremacists.
I've often wondered If men can identify as women and women can identify as men, and white can identify as black, and blacks can identify was white.... Why can't I identify as a veteran of the U.S. military with combat experience to help boost my political and employment prospects in the future?
Dawkins is a right winger fyi and is from a family of aristocratic slavers. That is where their wealth came from. He should be stripped of every last penny.