Dawkins isn't religion bashing. He's creationist bashing. There is a big difference.
Dawkins is an atheist who despises all religion.
He particularly hates creationists and reserves most of his venom for them, but it's not just creationists he hates.
I really doubt he is troubled by your distinction.
Skeptic: In River Out of Eden, you also say that, "Science shares with religion the claim that it answers deep questions about origins, the nature of life, and the cosmos. But there the resemblance ends. Scientific beliefs are supported by evidence, and they get results. Myths and faiths are not and do not" (p. 33). But doesn't one first have to make the choice or decision to use pragmatism as the standard by which we judge? That is, we must first agree to base our decisions on what works, rather than on revelation or intuition. Isn't the most we can ask of the religious crowd, "Either lay hands on flat tires and pray for the sick, rather than taking them to a mechanic or a doctor, or if you are not willing to be consistent, just shut up and go away?" Doesn't the religious view amount to, "When we're afraid, we seek God. When God doesn't answer our prayers, blame it on the Devil?"
Dawkins: Yes, it's a kind of pathetic, childish response to some failure.
Yes, you are correct.
Poor chose of words on my part.
"Dawkins isn't religion bashing. He's creationist bashing. There is a big difference."
Not to thin-skinned, easily offended Christians.
And Richard Dawkins and his particular brand of marxism and bigotry is a gift to creationists worldwide.
The gift that keeps on giving.
Three cheers for Dawkins:
Hip, hip hooray.
Hip, hip hooray.
Hip, hip hooray!
Remember though, Dawkins isn't someone to take seriously on evolution.
If you don't believe in G-d's word as in the book of Genesis which states G-d created the heavens and the earth, then it would suffice to say this bloke is bashing anyone who believes in the word of G-d? Once again we have intolerance from the far left. One thing they seem to forget about science, men are the ones who come up with the theories and men are the ones who prove these theories so who is to say they are always correct in their findings?