Finished (Audiobook) - "God is not Great" - Christopher Hitchens

I listened to "God is not Great" by Christopher Hitchens.  As I stated about Richard Dawkins books ("The Blind Watchmaker", "The Greatest Show on Earth" and "The God Delusion") and Stephen Hawking ("The Grand Design") I do appreciate the perspective that science and religion are distinctly separate, and rely upon different tenets (science is empirical - proof for even the most absurd conclusions must be treated using the same mechanisms and constraints; religion is faith based and ultimately rests upon an expert or body of experts that interpret events into a framework - no specific "event" can be used to disprove faith as it is not based upon scientific methods).

I found Dawkins arguments a little too strong - I'm happy with the Gould inspired separate worlds idea, but understand why he feels so strongly that in the current political environment (particularly the US) there is an activist element that is trying to undermine science directly from a religious standpoint (intelligent design) that is hypocritically using scientistic words to portray faith-based belief as scientific hypotheses.  As such, Dawkins feels the need to retaliate and show the hypocrisy for what it is.

I did  not, as such, find anything particularly problematic in Dawkins arguments - they basically outlined the scientific method, and did not find a need to place a pro-active God in the middle of events.  Hawking came to a similar conclusion from a physics standpoint - there is no need for an intervention in events once they are in play. Hawking's world "works" assuming that you have quantum mechanics and gravity - the universe will form given these conditions.

Hitchens has a much stronger viewpoint on the evils of religion, calling it child abuse in certain chapters, and argues that the basic idea of religion is dangerous as it undermines critical thinking.

From a religious perspective, I imagine Hitchens would be considered the most difficult to read - he allows the presence of a supernatural being the least room.  Dawkins also thinks religion is dangerous, but is less dogmatic in his arguments than Hitchens, and I suspect without the Intelligent Design crew at work, Dawkins probably would leave well enough alone.  Hawking is probably the easiest from a religious perspective - he argues that the universe doesn't need a god to have the processes function (e.g. no intervention required) but doesn't directly argue against religion (as both Dawkins and Hitchens have) nor does he say that God doesn't exist.