This site is not maintained. Click here for the new website of Richard Dawkins.

wendelin's Profile

wendelin's Avatar Joined about 7 years ago
Gender: Male

Latest Discussions Started by wendelin

More Discussions by wendelin

Latest Comments by wendelin

Go to: For sale: 13-year-old virgin

wendelin's Avatar Jump to comment 181 by wendelin

I'm actually with Henri on this... to a ccertain extent. No moral relativism for me: anybody forced to live a life not of their choosing is an abomination, women (or anyone else) enjoying fewer rights than others is an outrage, female infanticide is horrible.

However, the idea that having sex with a consenting 13 year old girl is "child abuse" is definitely arguable. Sexual maturity is biological, and happens way earlier than the culturally/legally mandated 18 years. To look down upon other cultures that consider biological sexual maturity as the only marker for when a girl is ready to have sex is elitist and racist.

Also, in this article (I say again, IN THIS ARTICLE), I see no evidence of women being deprived of their rights, or being forced into this trade against their will. On the contrary, they are empowered by their capacity to earn a good living and provide for themselves and their families. They aren't subservient to pimps or madams, they run their own lives and control their own destinies. Kudos to them, I say. To consider prostitution abominable in itself betrays a distinctly Judeo-Christian prudishness; to think that all prostitutes are downtrodden or in need of rescue is evidence of a western-supremacist mindset.

As long as these women are free to do as they wish, as long as they are earning enough money to take care of themselves and their health (as they clearly seem to be doing), what is the problem?

Tue, 15 Apr 2008 06:38:00 UTC | #153358

Go to: Hinduism and Buddhism offer much more sophisticated worldviews (or philosophies) and I see nothing wrong with these religions.

wendelin's Avatar Jump to comment 1 by wendelin

I don't know anything about Buddhism but I was brought as a Hindu and the major way in which it is different from the big 3 monotheistic faiths is UTTER INCOHERENCE. You could make practically any statement about Hinduism and it would be true. Hinduism teaches reincarnation, but not really. Hinduism has a million gods and goddesses, but they are all contained in a holy trinity - no, wait, it's all just one God - no, wait, there is just one god and there is ONLY god and everything from that pebble to the tapeworm in your belly is just various manifestations of the One Holy One.

The best I can say is that it's truly a free-for-all... you can believe whatever you wish and call yourself a Hindu. I have openly been an atheist since I was 10, and I've always been told that's Hinduism, too - at the "highest level" of Hinduism, there's no god belief at all. When Christian missionaries try to convert Hindus, they're often baffled to see Hindus listen interestedly to stories of Jesus and then cheerfully add a picture of Jesus to their list of Gods to worship.

I once challenged my father - who is very into Hindu philosophy - to make a single moral statement that would contradict Hinduism without a doubt. But a very popular interpretation of Hinduism is to believe that everybody, even murderers, thieves, rapists and lawyers, are here to do follow their Dharma (occupational principle) and do their Karma (ordained task), so they're never held *personally* responsible for their misdeeds. Hey, I'm a thief, this is what I do for a living! There are judges and gaolers and policemen whose job it is to throw thieves in jail, sure, but it's all as impersonal as can be, and ideally, nobody is supposed to harbour ill feelings towards anybody else.

It's very frustrating. It's also the reason why it's impossible to debate a Hindu.

Thu, 13 Dec 2007 13:55:00 UTC | #93818

Go to: The God Delusion and Alister E McGrath

wendelin's Avatar Jump to comment 17 by wendelin

Yet another normal, polite and intelligent believer, if rather boring and eager to agree. I get the feeling these guys are capable of thinking and speaking sense if only they weren't talking to atheists.

He's *right* that science can't say much about culture (except perhaps in an empirical measurement sort of way, after the fact)... but he's wrong to suggest atheists claim science IS the arbitrer of culture. He's *right* that a lot of people find comfort in religion, but he's wrong to say atheists claim otherwise (we only say people *shouldn't* be comforted by lies).

But get him to talk to an atheist and he ends up sounding like a moron. He attributes positions to Dawkins that no honest human being would hold. He misrepresents Dawkins's arguments and speaks in non sequiturs.

Shame. I'm beginning to think this dialogue is doomed.

Thu, 25 Oct 2007 06:38:00 UTC | #78019

Go to: Help Counter the New Atheist Crusade to 'Evangelize' America!

wendelin's Avatar Jump to comment 5 by wendelin

Do Fundies and bad grammar go hand in hand in America? I wonder what he means by putting "young and old" in quotation marks. Very existential.

Wed, 17 Oct 2007 07:29:00 UTC | #75716

Go to: Faith schools should not be tax-funded, and here's why

wendelin's Avatar Jump to comment 2 by wendelin

jimbob:

"...millions of YOU.."? Seriously? It's amazing how easily some men automatically classify anything remotely to do with women as "women's issues" i.e. "not my business" and "you women can take care of it".

Wed, 19 Sep 2007 11:50:00 UTC | #68174

More Comments by wendelin