The Times is at it again. In “A Free-for-All on Science and Religion” George Johnson discusses the growing animus scientifically minded folk have towards religion. Rather than enter the fray—which would be rather like entering the debate about whether one was for or against the present state of the universe—I have a constructive proposal. Let’s teach critical thinking and logic in high school. When people can grasp theories of the universe or what-have-you teach them simple confirmation theory. If we did this we could move away from an indoctrination model of education to a model of intellectual discovery. We might then avoid quotes like this: “We should let the success of the religious formula guide us,” Dr. Porco said. “Let’s teach our children from a very young age about the story of the universe and its incredible richness and beauty. It is already so much more glorious and awesome — and even comforting — than anything offered by any scripture or God concept I know.”
The arrogance of these people is really overwhelming when one considers what they're saying: "Religion is over, as of now, because we say so." It's a naive, ivory-tower solipsism of the most extreme sort to think "It's perfectly obvious to me, and so it will be to anyone: we just need to show people the clear and indubitable fact that God doesn't exist." Probably the best thing is not to dignify that with a response, I can only say.
...but seriously, here's another thought; when I hear the anti-religion zealots of the Dawkins/Harris stripe pontificate, it occurs to me that they would agree with one of Plantinga's main points in WCB: that the de facto and de jure question are not independent of each other. They seem to come to that conclusion, but from the opposite direction, as it were; and as they see it, the answer to the de facto question is clearly No, and so goes the de jure question. Hence the extreme intolerance.