Comment 23 by Tyler Durden

Let's look at your response's points individually:

"religion is evil" - have you read the Old Testament?

Not all rhetorical questions qualify as arguments, but I'll allow it assuming it to mean that the Old Testament is full of God telling one nation to kill another, etc. You are confusing the fact that the religious mind, like the atheist mind, has a natural morality that riles against this for the most part. Christians struggle with this OT God, and so gloss over those bits that are most morally indefensible. Thus their religion excludes such evils. And that is not just their personal religion, that is their official church religion too. I don't hear the pope or the archbishop of Canterbury calling for the slaughter of various people. In fact, I don't hear many religions or sects do that. Of course, there are one or two, and those are the ones most publicized, and should be criticized like they are. I will even agree that those individuals - and I loathe to extend it to communities - but even communities could be deemed evil. However, calling all religion evil because of the extremists is just nonsensical.

"raising kids as religious is child abuse" - raising kids with a fear of eternal damnation is child abuse.

Just stating something does not make it so. Can you explain how you came to the conclusion that it is child abuse?

"you can't be a good scientist and religious" - can you imagine a geologist who is also a YEC? Would you trust his/her findings? Would you publish his/her findings?

I would publish their findings if they make valid arguments based on empirical evidence, and their studies are done using proper scientific methods, and then passed a peer review. As a scientist you have to look at the evidence presented and not the person presenting it. But this is rather a diversion from the underlying false assumption that you make that all religious people are YECs (which would be yet another myth).