I don't know why this is suddenly a controversy as Dawkins even mentions the incident in his book "The God Delusion" So it's not as if he suddenly announced to the World that he favors pedophilia as his critic seems to presume. Sounds like another cheap shot at an atheist leader. Cap't JackIts controversial because we have a bad habit these days of treating the news as an academics sources OR something that all tells the truth and nothing but the truth. Until the link to Dawkins own website was given, i was thinking of just dismissing this as a possible misunderstanding. Even in the link http://www.richarddawkins.net/foundation_articles/2012/12/22/physical-versus-mental-child-abuse# he clearly states that his anecdotal evidence is not sufficient to make a general ruling. I'm not in favor of Dawkins, but I dont see how this comment of his would affect any arguments against God he makes. When will we ever learn to actually read scholarly and academic sources :down:
Dawkins is not my favorite person. As a matter of fact, he is speaking near me and I don’t plan to go. But it doesn’t make him wrong about claims of the lack of existence of deities.
I agree, Asanta. It’s annoying when people can’t be consistent. 
I have a very bright Libertarian in my Wednesday lunch group. He and I almost always agree about social problems and their solutions, but we just as stongly disagree about anything to do with government finances.
Occam
Dawkins is not my favorite person. As a matter of fact, he is speaking near me and I don't plan to go. But it doesn't make him wrong about claims of the lack of existence of deities.I don't dislike him, but I'm not a huge fan either. I've read some of his books and many of them seem on the level high school or younger concerning Evolution. He makes it so simple that I get board with his books very easily.
Excuse me for jumping into your conversation. I’m new here. However, sex offenders, and specifically child molesters, is my area of study (I’m a criminologist). I’d like to address two points- one about pedophilia and one about harm done to victims.
Molestation victims don’t experience “mild pedophilia.” Pedophilia is a mental disorder characterized by persistent sexual fantasies about pre-pubescent children. It may or may not involve the actual harm of a child. Child molesters aren’t necessarily pedophiles; some pick children as easy victims but would prefer adult victims. Children are molested (sadly enough), they don’t experience mild pedophilia. Pedophilia isn’t a verb. They aren’t pedophiled. There isn’t even such a gradation to pedophilia. Either you fantasize about children or you don’t.
There is a small and very unpopular body of literature on child sexual abuse that focuses upon societal reactions to the abuse. This literature posits that the harm from sexual abuse may actually derive from society’s response to it. If the child is young enough to not have learned that society considers this behavior wrong, they may not consider themselves damaged until others tell them they are. Dawkin’s experience may have been such. That’s not to say his attitude is correct, since irreparable harm- physical as well as emotional- is done to the majority of child molestation victims. But if his experience was different from the norm, of course it would color his perception of the topic. Add in the fact that this is crime that’s specific to this era and culture and it may be a little easier to understand the position he came from.
Stacy