Excellent points, dor, and as I said earlier, a Reign of Terror is scarcely to be preferred over an Inquisition.
Dawkins is thinking emotionally and not pragmatically, and certainly not scientifically on religious issues, IMO.
Here is an example of a pragmatic agnostic's thinking, which I can easily find common cause with--how about you, dor?
I worry more about the religious when they want to impinge on my rights from the point of view of a US citizen than the point of view of an agnostic, because my rights as the latter are predicated on my rights as the former. |
This is an important distinction to make, because there are more US citizens than US agnostics/atheists, and because as it happens, when the religious-minded wish to impinge on my constitutional rights, they also usually end up impinging on the rights of others who are not the same religion as they, or if they are of the same religion, have beliefs that do not require they try to shove them on others.
Therefore, I have common cause with religious people who, like me, do not wish their rights abridged by some noxious group of enthusiastic God-thumpers who believe their religious fervor outweighs the US Constitution.
And I'm happy to make that cause with them, and I'm not going to go out of my way to say to them "thanks for your help, even if you are a complete idiot to believe in that God thing." I'll just say thanks.
I think that should be sufficient for anyone, including Richard Dawkins.
Whatever: Thinking About The God Delusion