Why should it be "awkward"? He isn't responsible for his ancestor's beliefs or practices. Hell, my family owned slaves, I know for a fact that I'm not giving back any of the money. Fuck them, I need a new boat.

Apart from the idiocy of the smear-campaign itself, am I all too wrong in assuming that half of your Lords and Ladies over on your island have ancestors from that time, who made their money the same way? Considering how far genes can spread, I'd be surprised if even half of Europe's or the US's (native from that time on) families could claim they had no slave-traders, owners, hunters, etc. in their ancestry from five or six generations ago.

Most white people probably have at least one ancestor who owned slaves or was involved in something we would now consider morally wrong. I know at least one of mine did, as well as others who were instrumental in the wholesale theft of Maori land and property during the colonisation of New Zealand.

It's just something we, especially those of us who live in former colonies, have to recognise. In my case it made me more sympathetic to the problems that still face indigenous people, and it probably has a similar effect on Dawkins' championing of humanist values.

Good job he doesn't hail from Central Asia - they be blaming him for the Mongol hordes.

Nah, it's fuckwittery, but with an edge. The Christian establishment is rattled, religion is on its last legs in Britain, and the death-throes are going to be unpleasant to watch; they'll fight tooth & nail to avoid the inevitable.

It was a nice response though:-

Dawkins added: "As it happens, my ancestry also boasts an unbroken line of six generations of Anglican clergymen, from the Rev William Smythies (born 1635) to his great great great grandson the Rev Edward Smythies (born 1818). I wonder if [the reporter] thinks I've inherited a gene for piety too.

FYI, Dawkins on his website offers an instructive account of the "journalist's" tactics in obtaining this "story". (You'll be glad to hear it's also available in Polish. )

Godless Infidel wrote:I'm descended from a catholic priest.

Don't try to blame me for that BS.

Pf. My grandfather was a Greek-Orthodox priest. Beat that.

My multiple-greats grandneuter was unicellular. Beat that!

campermon wrote:...On the slave owning ancestor front; the odds are that if you are white, of african extraction or hail from the arab world then you probably had slave owning ancestors;..

If you're from just about anywhere you probably have both slave owning and slave ancestors. The effective ownership of one person by another has got to be at least as old as the first sizable settled communities - and is found in the histories of pretty much everybody.

210karman wrote:It was a nice response though:-

Dawkins added: "As it happens, my ancestry also boasts an unbroken line of six generations of Anglican clergymen, from the Rev William Smythies (born 1635) to his great great great grandson the Rev Edward Smythies (born 1818). I wonder if [the reporter] thinks I've inherited a gene for piety too.

What other reply is needed? Sums it up.

I doubt my family have kept slaves (they might have of course) but we have a long tradition of miners, criminals and workhouses so I'd say chances are slim.

And some French.