Originally posted here. While the first part of the post refers to a specific situation, I include it here because it might help Christians in general learn how to talk with atheists.

Intolerance is intolerable. But mix in ignorance and we're headed for the Dark Ages. I have yet to see the quotes from my post that you think are absolutist claims. You accuse me of not "liking" something?!?! You need to support your claims! Unless and until you provide evidence for your arguments you cannot expect me to respect what you say. Is that clear?

Go to my post. Copy the part you have a problem with. Write out exactly what your problem is and why. DO NOT psychoanalyze me. In other words, don't tell the world why I do or don't do the things I do. Tell them what I do and what you think about it and why. Then leave the defense to me. Do you understand? If not, perhaps you need to brush up on your logic. BTW, if the brightest insight you can provide is that I'm a stupid atheist, I may not consider it worth my time to defend my post. I see we've got brighter pennies around these forums and they will know the difference between crap and insight.

Okay, now I need to explain why ignorant intolerance is so damaging. Item #1: Falsehoods are being taught as fact by scholars with PhDs and they get away with it. Item #2: Because of this Christians put laws in place that limit science and hinder cures for life-threatening illnesses. Item #3: At the same time Christians put laws in place to forbid the teaching of science in public schools--or force the teaching of creationism and/or ID instead of science.

ID and creationism have no place in the science classroom! They should be reserved for religious studies or social studies but NOT science! Withholding scientific knowledge from the masses--withholding the funding required for scientists to learn and progress medical research--is withholding LIFE from human beings. And fundamentalists claim to be PRO-life. How hypocritical! How absolutely abhorable. They care more about a few bits of tissue in a petri dish than for millions of cancer sufferers.

But their scholars and politicians are paid to lie and tell them it's the other way around. The scholars and politicians tell them it's the tissue and unborn babies that suffer. And nobody cares for the mothers and their families. Nobody cares for the unwanted babies and their children. Nobody cares what happens once the babies are born. Or about the families of the murdered abortion doctors. All they care about is winning the political wars.

How abhorable is religion!

I'm sure you don't like the answer. Nor do I. It's ugly. Very ugly. You can educate yourself and help make it less ugly; be less intolerant of scientific advancement of knowledge.

"Why is Creationism not a Scientific Theory?" asks the title of a wikipedia article. The first paragraph explains:

Creationism is not considered to be science because it makes no testable hypotheses, is generally not falsifiable (and those parts that are falsifiable are rarely conceded by creationists) appeals to the supernatural. It is a pseudoscience at best, and religious dogma at worst.

The article goes on to describe the requirements of science, and common tricks used by pseudo-scientists. I haven't read the article yet but it sounds like it might be worth reading. There is also a part for "What Is At Stake." I assume that refers to the Christian side re what is at stake for them to give up pseudo-science.