However, as an aside, what Richard Dawkins, like Betrand Russell before him, fails to understand is that religions can and do change, and Voltaire's maxim of “If God did not exist, it would be necessary to invent him.” is very much true today. Dawkins selects the worst aspects of religion and takes potshots freely, and reveals his own pettiness and short-sightedness for all to see. He has no alternative, no solution, and he, like many atheists, burps out a bitter, cynical worldview as a means of spiritual “gotcha,” as if they're saying, “Ohhh, look, I think we all go to oblivion when we die, I'm so strong minded and intellectually honest.” However, they present their agenda as a means of “educating the public” even when the public doesn't show the slightest interest of being educated, God or No God. It's academic brinkmanship, nothing more.

Sounds like a contradiction Joe. Since it's one that also applies to me, I don't have any trouble understanding it. When humans start making sense I'll start worrying about it.