How does one argue against your idea of Biblical fundamentalist creationism without going after the source? You attack evolution on scientific grounds but claim a beginning based on completely un-scientific grounds. Once attacked, you become defensive and say that evolutionists just want to bash religion.
Then you make loaded comparision questions between evolution and communism. I'm sure there is a link somewhere, just like the community leaders of some of the Christian world are linked with molestation. Not all evolutionists are communists or racists (in fact, social darwinism was an extremely capitalist idea) and not all Christians are molesters. You're making an unfair statement.
Have you not made a loaded assumption in stating that I somehow represent Biblical fundamentalist creationism? Is that the only kind of creationism allowed? I've not reduced evolutionism to a singlular level like that.
"Not all evolutionists are communists . . ."
Very true. But all communists are evolutionists and atheists at heart.
". . .you become defensive and say that evolutionists just want to bash religion."
Given the general tone of discourse from evolutionists to creationists, I would say they take delight in bashing religion. Yes. Should they be denied credibility because they may be defensive about this? Does this somehow add weight to evolutionist "science?"