Don - We simply don't have that problem in Canada. That is why, being Canadian, I just avoid dealing with the few fundamentalists around here, cos it would be a waste of my time to deal with them, and they pose no significant danger. They are very few, they influence less than 1% of the vote here, and they have virtually NO influence on our national political process, because they don't get enough public support here to have any real clout whatsoever. This is NOT a country that encourages or would tolerate aggressive religious posturing at the ballot box! Anyone who tried it would not have a hope of winning their seat.

You're in an entirely different situation in the USA...one that I'd have to say is unique in the western world! You live in a country that is hamstrung by Christian fundamentalists.

I'm sorry about that. But I can't do anything about it. I don't LIVE in your country. There is NO way I can do anything about what's going on in your country...though, yes, it does concern me.

***

Steve, I was not criticizing Dawkins by calling him "a man with a mission". I was simply saying that I'm quite curious to know what impelled him to take up that particular mission (as opposed to 88,000 other things he could be doing instead). I'd be interested to know why it concerns him so much, because then I could understand him better. I like understanding people better. I came to this thread in the first place to make fun of idiots who were criticizing Dawkins over his ancestor's faults!....not to criticize Dawkins. You assume I'm attacking him? I am not.