I don't know what your stance is and I don't know the book's stance is.
All I know is what the synopsis and the comments state its primary arguments are - that religion is the cause of trouble with scientific literacy of the US public. Beyond that I have made no comments, but I see a lot of downvoting and feather ruffling in response to simple statement of facts. I did show with a link that the premise of the argument, that there is trouble with scientific literacy in the US, is questionable.
I responded to the question "where did you get that idea" and was downvoted when I answered the question. I find that interesting.
You were downvoted because your response so completely misinterpreted the parent's comment that the most generous interpretation was that you didn't read it carefully. While rational argument is good, one-way arguments are bad.
All I know is what the synopsis and the comments state its primary arguments are - that religion is the cause of trouble with scientific literacy of the US public. Beyond that I have made no comments, but I see a lot of downvoting and feather ruffling in response to simple statement of facts. I did show with a link that the premise of the argument, that there is trouble with scientific literacy in the US, is questionable.
I responded to the question "where did you get that idea" and was downvoted when I answered the question. I find that interesting.