I found Michael Brendan Dougherty 's essay, "In defense of creationists: Sure, they're misreading Genesis. But for all the right reasons" in The Week most refreshing and enlightening about one of today's most contentious topics: creationism vs. evolution. If we might put our biases aside and take a deep breath, maybe we could close the gap. I would especially recommend this to some of the posters in Chicago Now's Atheist in Wheaton blog.
Dougherty addresses the ideas from both sides, so don't think that he's singling out just one side in the below selection
To submit to the authority of science does not mean to place one's personal and irrevocable imprimatur on today's most supported theories. It simply means accepting the rational process of investigating claims about nature through rigorous observation and experimentation. What does it mean when laymen say they "believe in" a scientific theory? Must they decide between Stephen Jay Gould and Richard Dawkins on "punctuated equilibrium?" Who is supposed to be impressed by these declarations?
On the other hand, I've always found those Christians who hold to six-day accounts of man's origin difficult to refute and even more difficult to despise. There is a certain strength and flexibility to their tautology. Further, even though they're wrong on the science, they are right about the things that really matter to the human heart and to human civilization.
Well done, Mr. Dougherty. I might agree with everything, but it stands out, way above some of the emotional and non-sensical arguments that we're hearing. My own believe is that creationism and evolution are not mutually exclusive lines of thought.