Then either Dawkins has posited a non-sequitor, or the wikipedia article was misleading.

Quote:

near the end of the book Dawkins uses this to argue against the existence of God: "a deity capable of engineering all the organised complexity in the world, either instantaneously or by guiding evolution, . . . must already have been vastly complex in the first place . . ."



Just because God must be "complex", according to Dawkins, doesn't mean that God had/has nothing to do with humanity. I haven't read the book, but it seems that this is more of an argument against God's existence.

"The task force finds that...the unborn child is a whole human being from the moment of fertilization, that all abortions terminate the life of a human being, and that the unborn child is a separate human patient under the care of modern medicine."