Let us look at creationists and evolutionists.
Oh, I'm so sure this will be educational. Readers, have you taken your Maalox yet?
Creationists' dogma:"All humans are created equal."
You're thinking of the US Declaration of Independence.
The Creationist dogma is actually something more along the lines of: The Invisible Sky Monster blinked everything into existence. This doesn't really tell us much about equality. Futhermore, if the above claim were true, one would have trouble explaining why women and people of colour weren't even considered persons, until recently (in historical terms,) in every Christian dominated country.
Furthermore, the Israelites (you know, the people who wrote the Creation story that you refer to,) certainly had slaves. Not only that, but the owning of slaves is clearly condoned by the same religious texts from which you get your Creation story.
Not looking so good for the Creationist side.
On the the side of science:
Evolutionist's dogma:"Screw you it is the survival of the fittest."
When people use strawman arguments to attack their opponents, they always think they're being clever. The trouble is, the strawman often makes the person using it look ignorant.
Others have already covered the fact that this clearly is a strawman, in the comments on LeDaro's blogsite. However, we can go further, and prove that this is a strawman.
If those of us who accept science do share this dogma that LeDaro is attempting to smear us with, then one would expect that countries where there is a higher acceptance of the theory of evolution would show a higher rate of certain kinds of crimes, and in particular, higher rates of violent crimes. Yet studies have found the opposite to be true.
In order to demonstrate that "evolutionists" are prone to evil, LeDaro provides the following example: fundamentalist Christian George W Bush.
Bush and Cheney wanted to show Iraq and Afghanistan that they are the fittest. They don't necessarily admit to being evolutionist but monkey is what monkey does – the origin of species.
If that's not a facepalm right there, consider this lovely little piece, describing the extent to which George The Lesser's religious views were a driving force behind the war on Iraq.
You'll notice that LeDaro relies on "because I say so" arguments. Such arguments, made without evidence, are easily refuted by providing evidence against. Yet LeDaro is so brazen, that even when he tries an argument for which he knows that the evidence against is already widely known, he simply backs it up with even more "because I say so."
LeDaro, you truly have no idea how much of a fool that makes you look.