People are idiots if they argue against Religion.

"People that point fingers at religions for being bad (not the FOLLOWERS of the religions, but the religions themselves) are idiots." - PublicForumG-d This rather offensive comment made by PublicForumG-d is a notion I disagree with. My resolution in this debate is that if someone argues against religion that fact does not make them an idiot. A difference should be made between religion and religious followers. --- as an irrelevent side note --- I personally believe that religious followers, even terrorists, are not evil themselves but made that way by their religion.---- BUT TO BE CLEAR THAT IS NOT THE TOPIC OF THIS DEBATE. idï¿½iï¿½ot http://dictionary.reference.com... 1. A foolish or stupid person. 2. A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive. for my opponents sake we can ignore the second definition. I win this debate if i can prove that at least one person who has argued against religion is not an idiot. I provide. Richard Dawkins: - an evolutionary biologist - was awarded a Doctor of Science by the University of Oxford in 1989. - He holds honorary doctorates in science from the University of Westminster, Durham University and the University of Hull - and honorary doctorates from the Open University and the Vrije Universiteit Brussel. -He holds honorary doctorates of letters from the University of St Andrews and the Australian National University, and was elected Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature in 1997 and the Royal Society in 2001. - holds the Charles Simonyi Chair for the Public Understanding of Science at Oxford University - is a professorial fellow of New College, Oxford. - he made a widely cited contribution to evolutionary biology with the theory, presented in his book The Extended Phenotype, that the phenotypic effects of a gene are not necessarily limited to an organism's body, but can stretch far into the environment, including the bodies of other organisms. - he received; - a Royal Society of Literature award - a Los Angeles Times Literary Prize for his book, The Blind Watchmaker. - a Sci. Tech Prize for Best Television Documentary Science Programme of the Year, for the BBC Horizon episode entitled The Blind Watchmaker. - the Zoological Society of London Silver Medal (1989) - the Michael Faraday Award (1990) - the Nakayama Prize (1994) - the Humanist of the Year Award (1996) - the fifth International Cosmos Prize (1997) - the Kistler Prize (2001) - the Medal of the Presidency of the Italian Republic (2001) - and the Bicentennial Kelvin Medal of The Royal Philosophical Society of Glasgow. - Now this one is important > HE WAS RANKED NUMBER 1 on PROSPECT MAGAZINE"S 2004 LIST OF THE TOP 100 PUBLIC BRITISH INTELLECTUALS, as decided by the readers, receiving twice as many votes as the runner-up. - the Hamburg-based Alfred Toepfer Foundation awarded him its Shakespeare Prize in recognition of his "concise and accessible presentation of scientific knowledge". - He won the Lewis Thomas Prize for Writing about Science for 2006 - the Galaxy British Book Awards Author of the Year Award for 2007. - Another important one > he was listed by Time magazine as one of the 100 most influential people in the world in 2007. - awarded the Deschner Award. - He has become so prestigious that He actually has an award named after him called the Richard Dawkins Award. Clearly with all of these accomplishments we cannot assume that Richard Dawkins is an Idiot. Yet Richard Dawkins is most noted for arguing against relgion. I have provided an example of someone who argues against religion and is not an idiot. Therefore my resolution is proven. over to you.