Cake
  • Log In
  • Sign Up
    • Chris,

      I think that this was a "finished" conversation until @cvdavis added several comments today. He suggested in his comments that the original post was based on a biased religious article. Since I was the original poster and since I thought that the article from the Times of London was not religious in nature, I asked why cvdavis had made this accusation. I am not attempting to revive this discussion, I simply want to know what cvdavis's reason is for saying that the article was a biased religious twisting of Mr. Dawkins's comments.

    • Dawkins is a world leading expert of evolution and wouldn’t have been such a staunch critic of religion had he not first seen the attacks that the religious made on evolution. Ken Ham, creationism and young earth creationists are too much to stomach. I’ve seen it numerous times myself when parents come into school screaming about their kids being taught evolution and when religious groups try to tear down the teaching or curriculum of evolution. It’s one thing to have your beliefs but when these people start misrepresenting the science and attacking it as wrong and saying the science is evil and so are the people who promote it (scientists/educators) . That’s when scientists and people like myself say religion becomes a big problem. These people fear that if people accept evolution as the fact that it is, then their followers will start to question the rest of the religion.