Stopped reading at sentence 2 . . . where the writer says that our “ape programming” explains the “concept of original sin” . . . 1) Stupid idea even on its own terms (what of cultures without the concept of original sin?) 2) Rejects God and the Bible out of hand.
It’s rhetorically ham-handed, but not entirely stupid. The Fathers of the Church, some of whom were very literalist in their approach to Scripture, some of whom weren’t, but all of whom very much believed in God and the Scriptures, nonethless taught that the Fall made us more like brute beasts.
Chalk the article’s rhetoric up as an attempt to explain to liberals (who unaccountably insist on neo-Darwinism as their creation myth, and fancy human beings are reprogammable computers rather than animals as their creation account would suggest) the concepts inherent in “male and female he created them” and in the doctrine of the Fall by appealing to their own creation myth, and their consequences and read the article.