Talk:Essay: Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?

Archive1

The point of the essay Does Richard Dawkins have machismo?

The whole point of the essay was to highlight the point that contrary to the benefactor of the Professorship for the Public Understanding of Science, Charles Simonyi, it is self-evident to the more observant among us that Richard Dawkins is in no way, shape or manner, "Darwin’s Rottweiler".[1]. Even one of his own fan's admitted that he lacks machismo.

After being conquered by feminists, Richard Dawkins told a reporter: “I feel muzzled, and a lot of other people do as well,” he continued. “There is a climate of bullying, a climate of intransigent thought police which is highly influential in the sense that it suppresses people like me.”[2] (see: Essay: Dawkins is conquered and muzzled by women).

Presently, Muslim parents are effectively making British teachers backdown when it comes to the creation vs. evolution issue.[3] And Dawkins is powerless to stop this. Dawkins is Darwin's poodle and he always was Darwin's poodle.

The British newspaper The Telegraph reported in an 2008 article entitled Richard Dawkins: Muslim parents 'import creationism' into schools:

Prof Dawkins, a well-known atheist, also blamed the Government for accommodating religious views and allowing creationism to be taught in schools.

"Most devout Muslims are creationists so when you go to schools, there are a large number of children of Islamic parents who trot out what they have been taught," Prof Dawkins said in a Sunday newspaper interview.

"Teachers are bending over backwards to respect home prejudices that children have been brought up with. The Government could do more, but it doesn't want to because it is fanatical about multiculturalism and the need to respect the different traditions from which these children come."[4]

Johns Hopkins University Press reported in 2014: "Over the past forty years, creationism has spread swiftly among European Catholics, Protestants, Jews, Hindus, and Muslims, even as anti-creationists sought to smother its flames."[5]

The 21st century will be a century of desecularization and Dawkins is powerless to stop it. Already, the secularization rate in Britain is now zero (see: British atheism). And religious fundamentalism will grow in Britain and in the world at large due their significantly higher fertility rate and other factors (see: Growth of religious fundamentalism and Causes of desecularization). Conservative (talk) 03:38, 1 April 2019 (EDT)

If you have to explain the point of an essay on its talk page, the essay itself needs rewriting / reframing in order to make that point clear. JohnZ (talk) 12:53, 1 April 2019 (EDT)

I don't have to explain the point of the essay on the talk page. One, there is no denying that Latino ladies are not big fans of Richard Dawkins. And the reason is obvious. He lacks machismo. Second, even fellow British, atheist Daniel Came, recognizes that the new atheist Richard Dawkins appears to be a coward (see: Atheism and cowardice). As much as I hate to say it. I won this argument hands down. Olé! Olé! Olé!Conservative (talk) 17:12, 25 January 2020 (EST)