He wasn’t was he? Like anyone else, he was expressing his opinion of his personal experience, to which he is entitled, whether you agree with him, or not, as would seem to be the case.

Richard Dawkins is entirely entitled to have an opinion. However, comparing a relatively strict Christian upbringing to child sexual abuse, and then suggesting the former is more serious than the latter, is disgusting. It trivialises child sexual abuse, and if you think that having to learn the names of minor prophets is worse than being groped, prodded or otherwise violated by an individual under whose pastoral care you resided as a child, then you have a very odd outlook on life. Dawins used his experience to suggest that childhood religious indoctrination is somehow the far worse of the two offences, and therefore the real crime is trying to raise your children with your own religious beliefs. Therefore we are focusing on the wrong area, apparently. He could have steered well clear of that subject, or framed it in a far less antagonistic manner.