veritas omnia vincit

Must Science declare a holy war on religeon?

This is an interesting article from the LA Times, discussing whether it is productive for 'New Atheists' in the USA to follow Richard Dawkin's 'hardline' approach to faith and science (i.e. there is no place in science for religeon and the scientifically literate should reject all forms of religion) and if science and religion can be compatible.

This early paragraph (answering the question 'who will read Dawkin's latest book') caught my eye:

Surely not those who need it most: America's anti-evolutionists. These religious adherents often view science itself as an assault on their faith and doggedly refuse to accept evolution because they fear it so utterly denies God that it will lead them, and their children, straight into a world of moral depravity and meaninglessness. An in-your-face atheist touting evolution, like Dawkins, is probably the last messenger they'll heed.

The article argues that science needs to take a moderate stance on the compatability of science and religion if science is to be adopted by the American Faithful. It has some interesting points to make about the attitudes of fundamentalist christians in the US towards science itself, and even more about the 'inner fighting' within the scientific community over 'total atheism' vs 'religeous acceptance'.

Thoughts?