modulous writes:
Do we attack dogmatic religious beliefs as strongly as we attack other dogmatic beliefs? Do we attack only fundamentalist religious beliefs, and give a break to people like theistic evolutionists?
We need not attack dogmatic beliefs, but neither can we tolerate them. There clearly exist a wide range of gradations of religious conviction, ranging from unembodied spirituality to fundamentalism, so our opposition should be scaled to the level of dogmatism.
So yes, we need to cut theistic evolutionists some slack, because they represent an improvement over literal dogmatists. They provide a stepping stone between the extremes that might encourage some to (fearfully) cross over to the fully rational world. For this reason they are often more demonized by the dogmatists than are atheistic evolutionists.
That said, I am definitely of Dawkins' camp and opposed to any form of appeasement for purposes of political gain. But we won't make progress in winning minds from the other side if we don't show some tolerance toward those who want to try and walk along the fence. Let them struggle with that balancing act on their own. At least they are not denying science - only clinging to residual superstitions. Those who cling to dogma and deny science cannot be reasoned with or convinced, so should probably be ignored.
EZ
™ Version 4.2
