Catholic apologist weighs in on Dawkins-Watson controversy, glorifies St Paul as champion of gender equality(!)

I wrote earlier about Trent Horn’s hatchet job on atheists in Catholic Answers. There is one part in that article, though, that deserves further discussion.

In a segment titled “Throwing stones in glass belief systems”, Horn says:

Atheists should be careful when they criticize religion, because some of these criticisms can be applied to atheism as well. Consider the claim made by some atheists that Catholicism is bad for women because the church opposes legal abortion or female ordination, which they claim is bad for women.

Well, it is not so hard to come to the conclusion that among all religions (Wahhabi Islam not withstanding), Catholicism is not just bad for women, it is probably among the very worst. Not only are they do they give women a second class status barring them from having any power in the church, they are not just against abortion, they are against any control women may exercise over their reproductive health. And by the way, does Horn believe back-alley abortions are not bad for women?

But here is where it gets interesting.

But let’s turn the tables and ask, “Is atheism good for women”? In 2012, a rash of sexual harassment cases at atheist conferences led several female atheists to cancel their appearances at an annual event called “The Amazing Meeting” (or TAM), which lead to a massive drop in female attendance. Richard Dawkins further incensed female atheists by saying that women who complained about unwanted sexual advances needed to “stop whining” and “grow a thicker skin”.

While Horn doesn’t give us the full context (Dawkins was not speaking about all women, rather specifically the so called “elevatorgate”), one thing is clear: regardless of what you mean think about this incident, Dawkins is one individual and, as high a status as he may have among atheists, he doesn’t have the power to tell atheists what to do or not to do, which is kind of different from the catholic church hierarchy, from popes on down, keeping women second class citizens for centuries to millenia.

[I]f God exists, then there is a foundation for male and female equality, because both sexes were created in the image and likeness of God (Gen. 1:27) and both would deserve equal respect.

Isn’t it funny that he quotes genesis in the context of equality, but forgets that Genesis says women were essentially an afterthought?

2:20 And Adam gave names to all cattle, and to the fowl of the air, and to every beast of the field; but for Adam there was not found an help meet for him. 2:21 And the LORD God caused a deep sleep to fall upon Adam, and he slept: and he took one of his ribs, and closed up the flesh instead thereof; 2:23 And Adam said, This is now bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh: she shall be called Woman, because she was taken out of Man.

Or that women are to blamed for all of humanities miseries, and as punishment, they are subjected to subjugation and have to endure pains of childbirth?

3:16 Unto the woman he said, I will greatly multiply thy sorrow and thy conception; in sorrow thou shalt bring forth children; and thy desire shall be to thy husband, and he shall rule over thee.

And then it gets even more bizarre:

As Paul says, “[T]here is neither male nor female; for you are all one in Jesus Christ” (Gal. 3:28).

How noble. Of course this is not the only thing that Paul said, regarding gender relations and the role of women. In fact, Trent could have hardly gone for a more misogynistic character than Paul. Paul’s attitude toward women is almost comical; an in, if women do not cover their hair in church, their hair shall be shaved, because they are second class by creation:

1 Corinthians 11:5 But every woman that prayeth or prophesieth with her head uncovered dishonoureth her head: for that is even all one as if she were shaven. 11:6 For if the woman be not covered, let her also be shorn, but if it be a shame for a woman to be shorn or shaven, let her be covered. 11:7 For a man indeed ought not to cover his head, forasmuch as he is the image and glory of God: but the woman is the glory of the man. 11:8 For the man is not of the woman: but the woman of the man.11:9 Neither was the man created for the woman; but the woman for the man.

I am not going to list all the horrible things Paul says about women here, but some of the good ones are: 1 Corinthians 14:35, 1 Cornithians 1 11:3, 1 Timothy 2:11-12, Ephesian 5: 22-23.

Really, I must say I am disgusted, and dismayed. How stupid does Horn think his audience are? Does he think we can’t READ?

So to go back to Horn’s question: yes, atheism is good for women, because we don’t have the Bible, and specifically, because we have no St Paul.

(A final note to those who still feed on the drama stemming from “elevatorgate”: really, it is time to stop. You are only feeding the likes of Horn.)