Better than Marr
I am intolerant of religions that preach bigotry, as American Fundamentalist Christians do. They are trying to amend the Constitution, for goodness sakes. They are trying to take away our right to birth control, and they are anti-science. The religious right believes that they are foot-soldiers in a culture war that they have been fighting ever since Darwin had a brilliant idea. Furthermore, they are apocalyptic in their worldview, and they are very much pro-war. A more destructive group of people is hard to imagine. I know some lovely Christians, who are truly Christ-like, and they condemn these activities as much as I do. But they do not police their own people, they are passive, they follow their religion's authoritarian model, and therein lies the danger. Someone has to object to the creeping fundamentalism that is guiding public policy in this country.
This paragraph is full of many assumptions, falsehoods, and generalizations that you should really reconsider. You make a few very biased guesses about something, then pile on more guesses about other things, and it just doesn't come out very well as a whole. Like this "anti-science" remark. First of all, it is your opinion that the hypothesis of macroevolution is automatically correct and anything against it is not true "science", that all "American Fundamentalist Christians" oppose the hypothesis, that all who oppose it don't do so on the grounds of believing other theories but on being simply "anti-science", and that those who hold those personal views consider that apart of some campaign to get the public to agree. This layering of assumptions and biases isn't very convincing.