You have a fair point, name calling isn't particularly endearing in intelligent conversation. I suppose the strong language is a response to my feeling that D

You have a fair point, name calling isn't particularly endearing in intelligent conversation. I suppose the strong language is a response to my feeling that Dawkins did abuse his position in that incident. I also feel that he is an unnecessarily divisive personality due to the hard line he takes (look at the controversy his name being mentioned on HN has caused amongst a group who I would imagine are sympathetic to his message).