That is an interesting way to look at the analogy and I appreciate that.
I, perhaps incorrectly, glossed a bit over the friend/stranger distinction in his tweet.

I agree with you. In the abstract, he should have picked something innocuous. However, I think he does try to be a bit inflammatory to get attention. Maybe he is connecting the rape analogy tot he pedophilia analogy. I've seen in the board several comments that basically say "he was just a little fondled and wasn't…

I agree with you. However, can't people disagree with the statement that all rape is equal without being seen as an apologist? All murder is not equal but anyone how makes this observation is not immediately condemned as a supporter of murder. Maybe Dawkins' history illuminates his true feelings more than these posts…

It is a matter of perspective. A rape is a rape to the victim as well. However, neither of which are treated so black and white to society.

Condensation is worse than yelling, but that is not an endorsement of yelling

You may be correct, but I don't think that can be determined from the content of his tweets alone.

I think that illustrates one of many problems with twitter, namely that there can be just as many interpretations of it as there are people reading it. That people may disagree with the interpretation also doesn't mean they endorse rape. In my opinion, he's using a bad example for a basic concept. While it may be true…

I can agree with that, I just disagree with the premise that "atheists like this guy because they enjoy hearing their own opinions reverberated" is an unfair generalization.

and yet that is not an endorsement for murdering your spouse in a jealous rage, right?

What does this have to do with being an atheist?

I do think he made the stranger/non stranger argument in a later tweet. It is much weaker logically than the violence/non-violence

You can also intentionally kill someone and be charged with different degrees of murder ("heat of passsion" vs. "cold blooded").

The experiences of the victims will always vary and his specific premise could be completely wrong particular with respect to the experience of the respective victims. But as society overall…

Yes both murders are terrible, both rapes are terrible, but for some reason as society we do judge them to be terrible things of different degrees. I agree that this is not particular solace for the victims in either case.

Sure you can, nobody said you can't. The main illustration by that is that Dawkins is an idiot for using twitter to try to make any sorts of substantive statement.

I don't disagree, though to be fair the knifepoint rapist is much more likely to go to jail.

The law reflects society's values.
The particular example by Dawkins is poor. The principle that there are different degrees of crime and that the existence of such degrees does not mean the lesser one is endorsed, is correct.

You seem to be focusing on "stranger" I was focusing on "knifepoint"

Are there not typically degrees of rape? How are they distinguished? If I were to give Dawkins the benefit of the doubt, for whatever reason, the distinction he is making isn't that it is a stranger but the element of violence involved. Setting aside his assumption that date rape doesn't involve physical violence.

I'm not sure it is academic since the "murder" in the respective cases will serve different sentences meaning that society consider them to be different scopes of crime

but there are different degrees of murder where some are considered "worse" than others and the resulting punishment can vary dramatically.