Should Richard Dawkins ever be respected by anyone ever since he made those thoughtless choice of words?

This was only brought to my attention recently and I was not aware that Dawkins believed in a concept of “mild pedophilia”.

Dawkins was interviewed by The Times back in 2013 he recalled an incident he had with a teacher as a young boy in the 1950s.

“... pulled me on his knee and put his hand inside my shorts… I don’t think he did any of us lasting harm…

… I am very conscious that you can’t condemn people of an earlier era by the standards of ours. Just as we don’t look back at the 18th and 19th centuries and condemn people for racism in the same way as we would condemn a modern person for racism, I look back a few decades to my childhood and see things like caning, like mild pedophilia, and can’t find it in me to condemn it by the same standards as I or anyone would today.”

Personally the child abuse and racism that occurred in times past was never ok or acceptable. Just because certain attitudes back in those days permitted it doesn’t make it right. Just as I don’t condone the execution of women who commit adultery under sharia law. The specific culture of the time may argue that its acceptable; but that doesn’t make it so. Its puzzling to me that Dawkins being as outspoken as he is against organised religion, cannot find it in himself to criticise inappropriate behaviour of the 1950s (and more distant pasts). Many barbaric religious traditions and beliefs are based on much older standards and cultures. So why would the 1950s and other eras be exempt from criticism?

Source:

Huffington Post