>> I had to think about that one, and concluded that I was using heathen to mean people who are opposed >> to Christianity.



Then, perhaps you should have said anti-Christian. Then again, that would suggest the only faith that (believes in creationism/abhors evolution) are Christians. Interesting...



> If that is true, then why do I seem to get into so many arguments with Christians about it? :)

>> Perhaps because you are talking about evolution?  



Hmmm. The original post (by a Christian) suggested that "most Christians do not reject evolution".



>> If you were discussing non-marital sex, you would be asking why you get into so many arguments with >> Christians (and other people of faith, I daresay) about sexual morality.



Not true. I have, in fact, discussed that topic before with various religious folks, and I have never been treated with the same kind of scorn and venom (and naivety) I receive when discussing evolution. I think it's because evolution calls into question who they actually are as opposed to who they want themselves to be. (However, knee-jerk reactions to either topic seems to be magnified in the U.S. for some reason).



>> I think that with regard to paleo diet, the whole creation/evolution debate is a bit of a red herring.



Agree, and disagree. The problem is the fundamentalist view that presumes the age of humans to be no more than 6000 years. If one is to accept that premise (and, I'm pretty sure it is a small minority), then paleo means absolutely nothing and the "age of the hunter/gatherers" is what - one generation?



>> unless one rejects the Scriptures a priori, simply because they were written by people...



There, fixed it for you :)



OK, somebody shoot me so I'll shut up.