all 11 comments

[–][deleted] 11 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 0 fun12 insightful - 1 fun -  (15 children)

The trans movement is so fundamentally anti-science and is basically a new religion so it's no surprise which side of the issue Dawkins is on. It is a surprise how long it took him to get involved though.

[–]lefterfield 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (14 children)

I'm not sure why it's no surprise. Plenty of atheists turned "science" and "reason" into their own religion, and went right along with the gender cult. Personally I'm pleasantly surprised that Dawkins isn't a hypocrite in this regard. I don't agree with him on many things, but I can respect him on this.

[–][deleted] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Anyone who claims to be scientific and reasonable who goes along with the gender cult is neither of those things.

[–]JoeyJoeJoe 2 insightful - 2 fun2 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 2 fun -  (12 children)

Please explain how being reasonable could be categorised in the same way as being religious.

[–]lefterfield 6 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 1 fun7 insightful - 2 fun -  (11 children)

You should note that I put "reason" in quotes, to suggest that the people doing this were in fact, not being reasonable. Worship of "science" is dangerous when you aren't looking at all the facts(or not even looking at the actual facts), or twisting evidence to conclusions you want to believe in. A person doesn't have to call that a particular religion to still do it. The fact is, quite a few "skeptics" call themselves trans-inclusive, without any indication they understand the irrationality of it. I'm pleasantly surprised Dawkins wasn't one of them.