[T]here's really no other conclusion than to call belief that intelligent design is legitimate science prima facie evidence of irrationality.Her reply:
In your opinion, sir, which I do not and will not accept. ...Curious. I was unaware that rationality was a matter of opinion or could be established by fiat. I was naively under the impression that truth was established by evidence and logical argumentation, that a dialectic between opposing points of view was a productive means to discover the truth, and that rationality entailed believing the truth on the basis of evidence and logical argumentation. Silly me.
If you wish to comment on my blog, you must accept the following premise:
I am just as rational in my acceptance of God and/or Intelligent Design as you are in your denial of same.
(She also asserts, rather amusingly, that I have "come into [her] cybernetic living room." This metaphor seems a trifle inapt: I don't know what her living room is like, but my living room is most assuredly not on display to (potentially) a hundred million people on the Internet. When I criticize someone publicly by name (as she has done me) I do not plead privacy to escape criticism.)
I think Hitchens is on to something: Religion really does poison everything.