What do you think of this view of Richard Dawkins?

Yeah that would seem reasonable, however he says that by saying nothing and not trying to correct the errors, then it is as if you are allowing errors to continue. You in fact are helping to perpetuate errors if you do not speak up.

I am not a theist, and many call me anti theistic. I have my views but I am not opposed to someone having their religious beliefs. However; when it comes to political or social issues, I feel that religion has absolutely no authority to impose it's doctrine onto others. In my opinion the best religious people are the one's that keep it to themselves and not try to impose their beliefs onto others.

You could say I am being hypocritical by making the claim that they shouldn't be allowed to state their opinion. I would agree with you, however stating an opinion is one thing, but forcing laws based on beliefs in which I do not hold is completely another. We need to have a neutral position to base society upon, weather you agree with it or not, is not up to any religion to decide. It should be a secular decision not a religious one.

It's funny, isn't it, how believers in a so-called non-material god nevertheless tend to have a particularly unpleasant penchant for imposing extremely material consequences of their belief in his existence on everyone else.

such as?.........

Although a cute observation, I'd be willing to bet secular ideologies have lain waste to hundreds of times the amount of lives that religious ideas have.

As far as Dawkins goes, he is a zealot of the belief of Science, much in the way the pope is a zealot in the Belief of Roman Catholicism. See this thread (I'm post #58) I tend to distrust any zealot, regardless of the banner they wave.

"I counsel you my friends: Distrust all in whom the impulse to punish is powerful" - Nietzsche