Richard Dawkins Says Islam Continues to Teach Stonings, World Domination, While Christianity and Judaism Have Moved Away
Atheist author Richard Dawkins said in Twitter messages on Monday that Islam continues to uphold punishments such as stonings, and preaches about world domination, while Christianity and Judaism have moved away from such "Middle Ages" teachings.
"Laws designed for 7th-Century tribal desert society are not always well suited to modern conditions. Jews & Christians mostly realise this," Dawkins wrote in a post.
"Yes, Christianity & Judaism are every bit as stupid as Islam. But they don't preach world domination, theocratically imposed law, stoning, etc.," he added in a follow-up post. "And yes, Christianity and Judaism USED TO preach equally terrible things. But we live NOW, not in the Middle Ages. That's kind of relevant."
Get Our Latest News for FREE
Dawkins has criticized Islam on a number of occasions in recent months, and in January said that not all religions are equally violent.
"No, all religions are NOT equally violent. Some have never been violent, some gave it up centuries ago. One religion conspicuously didn't," Dawkins wrote following the terror attacks in Paris in January that left 17 people dead.
"Of COURSE most Muslims are peaceful. But if someone's killed for what they drew or said or wrote, you KNOW the religion of the killers."
And back in October 2014, the author of The God Delusion stated that 17-year-old Nobel Peace Prize winner Malala Yousafzai might leave her religion when she grows older.
"Of course Malala is religious now but give her time, she's only 17 & getting the education she fought for on behalf of girls like her," he tweeted at the time.
He later clarified that he was not criticizing Yousafzai, but defending her from others that attacked her for her faith.
"I congratulated Malala. People then attacked her for wearing hijab. I DEFENDED her; she's only 17. So I was attacked for 'attacking' her," he said.
Block Bot, a program that hides people on Twitter deemed to be offensive or abusive, placed Dawkins on its list back in March, after other users accused him of being racist and a "rape-apologist."
The atheist professor shot back and said that he objects against libel.
"I have no objection to being blocked. Please block me if you wish. What I object to is being libelled, and linked with spammers and harassers," Dawkins said in response.
"People are confusing the act of blocking, with libelling those blocked. Blocking is fine. Block me and I won't miss you. Libelling is not," he added.
