(1) Simply because science has no definitive means to describe a particular phenomenon does not disprove the whole of science, or any particular theory or hypothesis, nor represent evidence for a deity or set of deities. Nor does it mean science will forever not have a way to.
Never said it did. Anywhere. I love science.
(2) The older couple passing out DVDs are not trying to tell you what legally consenting adult you can or can't fuck, or that you should remain indoors on a particular day, or that you should devote any amount of time to praying in a particular direction every day, or whether or not you can eat meat on a particular day, or that the members of the other gender are less than you, etc. What they might push is a stay in school mentality. The horror.
So, you're equivocating relatively recent rules espoused by a man-made institution with some sort of evidence of the non-existence of the supernatural?
(3) Of course there are bad apples among atheists as with any group, but no soldier has ever killed a man, woman or child in the name of atheism. Aside from greed, God is the only other cause of war.
The title of my post is "hate comes in many forms", not "hate comes in identical forms."
(4) For all the intellectualism you would no doubt like ascribed to your post, from the undeserved rating to the overt "I'm above even he" mentality, you are owed none of it. For one thing, the nonsensical "atheists are just as bad" view you've adopted / espouse is the common neckbeard position on forums and imageboards the world over. For another, whoever originally came up with the view was clearly not aware of Dawkins' actual views or work. He freely admits his errors. He freely points to where science has gotten things wrong.
I start out by saying "I have no qualms against atheists nor people who believe in the supernatural. I do have an issue with those in these groups..." and end by saying "ignoring the veracity of the content of Dawkin's beliefs, simply recognize Dawkin's actions." I don't see where I ascribed all atheists as having a negative message, just Dawkins and his followers. That was the point. The irony that Richard Dawkins and his followers have the same negative message as the people he is so against.
No intellectual touché or overt "I'm above even he" to be taken from that, is there?