Dawkins - 'The God Delusion'

I think just the fact that a prominent fundie minister (Ted Haggard) would take meth and have sex with men is very telling in itself, along with the fact that so many fundies think that mainstream christianity should set the bar for morals in the country. It is a reflection of their base hypocricy....Or maybe all evos and all christians are not represented by the rabid failings of 1 prominent man in their domain.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

Well, it just so happens that Haggard's position is hypocritical while Dawkins is not. That doesn't change the fact that people invalidly use the Haggard scandal to pain a bleak picture of Christianity in the same way you are invalidly using Dawkin's atheism to associate atheism with evolution.You would also probably object to me labeling the ID movement as Christian when I point out that the majority of proponents of ID are Christian who also write about ID as it related to Christianity. So what?Dawkins is an athiest who believes in evolution. That does not make evolution athiestic any more than painting stripes on my volvo makes it a racecar.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

well, you have at least 2 evos here admonishing support for Dawkins with 1 supporting.And pretty much as usual you ignore my point that one man does not represent an entire community simply by his own fiat.You also ignored my analogy to labeling all IDers christian. Would you or would not not object? Or are you just going to convienently ignore it again.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I prefer the approach that Sam Harris takes. He targets his message more toward the effects of religion rather than the notion of God. At least from what I have read and heard of him. His point is more about why are we giving religion a free pass to dictate practical matters of civilization without criticism.As an example, you can display support for stem-cell research but it is poltically taboo to show how religious objections to step-cell research is total unobjective superstition.I haven't read enough of Sam to know if like Dawkins he believes the question of the existence of God is scientific. I would hope that Dawkins is alone in that delusion.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)

I think one important point is being missed here.IIRC, Dawkins has often said that one of the reasons that he says what he says is to empower people who are already atheists to speak out about the important issues. He also targets his message to people on the fence and again IIRC he has even said exactly that somewhere.Harris seems to specifically design his message for the religious. His newest book is 'Letter to a Christian Nation'. His goal is direct dissassembly of the religious or at least the religious influence on society by the body of the currently religious.As an analogy, Dawkins is building an army while Harris is a saboteur.

---

Of course, biblical creationists are committed to belief in God's written Word, the Bible, which forbids bearing false witness; --AIG (lest they forget)