Well I say under-evolved because there's no evidence that humans are "highly" evolved, and there's never been any demonstration (which is what science is) that we changed over time from primitive man to modern man. And anyway "under-evolved" would be a creature that isn't fully evolved right? And no, it's not only 'cos Dawkins doesn't share my beliefs, but because I really do think he sounds like an idiot....I mean, you gotta admit, even if you are an atheist the dude sounds pretty fuckin' stupid. Oh, and I like that little "save" you did for Dawkins, saying that "somebody asked him to demonstrate the intelligence of a creationist", you know damn well that's not what he was doing. And you know that he sounded ridiculous with his "sexy monkey demonstration".

Because if he was any kind of intellect, he would not have acted inappropriately by imitating a primate, like some kind of under-evolved primitive man. But rather an intelligent well-spoken "highly evolved" man. That's what makes him a moron.

I am a religious person.....I do not support a secular godless state. Such states anyhow never last more than 80 years.

CATHOLIC STATE please!