Can’t blame a man for trying to make a buck.  But that didn’t stop famed atheist Richard Dawkins from getting dragged online after making this proposal to his followers:

“My ‘Atheism for Children’ book will be unflinching, not a storybook: children won’t beg parents to buy it for Xmas. Are there parents who’ll want to buy it for their children anyway?  Do you anticipate a demand? Would you like to see a ‘children’s God Delusion’ by me published?”

Let’s leave aside the bizarre reference to Christmas – a holiday that Dawkins apparently celebrates and recognizes despite its fairly significant Christian overtones (I’m sure he just sees a winter solstice celebration).  What’s funny about this is that the entire proposal undermines and truly gives lie to two of the most frequent claims of atheists like Dawkins:

1. That atheists are open-minded and don’t have a set of faith convictions.

2. That atheists do not feel the need to proselytize or evangelize their faith.

What is the point of writing such a book like this, anyway?  Is it not to do the precise thing that Dawkins complains nearly every day about Christians doing?  Namely, indoctrinating children to believe something rather than allowing them to slowly learn and conclude what they will, when they will.  (By the way, that accusation is flatly absurd given that no child grows up in a vacuum – Dawkins can be confident that a child’s “learning” will take place in secular institutions that adopt his atheistic dogma as the presuppositions behind all curriculum.)

In fact, hilariously, Dawkins went on to add that very claim in a subsequent statement about his Atheist Children’s Bible:

“I really want to not indoctrinate.  Perhaps I can help parents arm them against indoctrination by schools, g’parents & religious books. & against taunting by religious schoolmates. Help them think on evidence, e.g. for evolution. “What do you think?” is my continual refrain.”

Yes, because if there is one thing the world knows about Richard Dawkins, it’s that he has an extremely open mind.  I’ll let your eyes slowly roll back down into your skull before continuing.

Undoubtedly to Richard’s dismay, the majority of respondents to his query found his schtick both disingenuous and off-putting.  For instance:

“So, just to be clear, your marketing strategy is to write a book for children that doesn’t appeal to children; that children will not ask their parents for.”

Another commenter pointed out that the entire purpose of offering this “help” to parents was for indoctrination:

“parents will buy because it’s a way of thinking THEY think is right and children should adopt, not because it appeals to something their children are interested in or curious about or self-motivated to learn . . . isn’t that . . . isn’t that . . . indoctrination?”

Why, yes it is.  It’s almost as though, and try to follow me here, the intellectual and philosophical honesty of celebrity atheists is somewhat lacking.  Perhaps commenter Junior General said it best:

“I’m glad I lived long enough to see peak Dawkins.”

We all are, Junior.  We all are.