hidden behind religious attitudes to other topics that have no real link with morality?

Here's a problem: the author (Dawkins), after saying " This is important, because moral considerations lie hidden behind religious attitudes to other topics that have no real link with morality", immediately gives us an example of one of the "other topics" - Darwinian evolution, which sarcastically has real link to morality (the passage or the context is exactly under the chapter title "The root of morality: why are we good?"). Because according Dawkins, Darwinian process, rather than God, gave birth to morality.

Has Dawkins expressed it unsatisfactorily?

Context:

Many religious people find it hard to imagine how, without religion, one can be good, or would even want to be good. I shall discuss such questions in this chapter. But the doubts go further, and drive some religious people to paroxysms of hatred against those who don't share their faith. This is important, because moral considerations lie hidden behind religious attitudes to other topics that have no real link with morality. A great deal of the opposition to the teaching of evolution has no connection with evolution itself, or with anything scientific, but is spurred on by moral outrage. This
ranges from the naive 'If you teach children that they evolved from monkeys, then they will act like monkeys' to the more sophisticated underlying motivation for the whole 'wedge' strategy of 'intelligent design', as it is mercilessly laid bare by Barbara Forrest and Paul Gross in Creationism's Trojan Horse: The Wedge of Intelligent Design.