I want to answer the questions about Dawkins. It took me some effort to track this down, but it appears to be from the Concordia Journal from Summer 2017 (Concordia Journal | Summer 2017 by Concordia Seminary - Issuu). The quotes in questions were written by two seminary professors. The context of the quote is important. Here is what was said:
"If scientists carry a caricature of Christianity filtered through the media, the same applies to many of us when it comes to science. The media is happy to give a voice to and promote “star-power scientists” like Richard Dawkins, but they do not represent all scientists just as the Westboro Baptist Church does not represent all Christians.
We ourselves run the risk of describing (and interpreting) the supporting data for evolutionary theory inaccurately, or we describe the theory in hundred-year- old terms. Pastors who misrepresent the status of the field and misrepresent what scientists are saying and not saying, run the risk of losing credibility among their congregants who have a strong scientific background. As in any discipline, we need to state the position of evolutionists in such a way that the scientist can say, “Yes, that’s exactly what I am saying.” Only then are we in a position to analyze it."
There were three other quotes about Dawkins in this journal issue that I am reproducing here:
“Contemporary materialists like Richard Dawkins and Daniel Dennett, from whom we heard earlier, will point to the way science offers comprehensive explanations of the universe and conclude that God is not only unnecessary for understanding the universe, but unnecessary altogether. Proponents of intelligent design agree with this logic but not the conclusion.”
“Some scientists even become militantly anti-religion or anti-Christianity. Religion is a threat to the system on which they stake their daily lives, their place within the universe, and their perception of meaning in the universe. People from Richard Dawkins to Stephen Hawking receive a level of media attention that gives the impression that all scientists are of like mind.”
“First, most scientists distinguish their work from the work of those who have
moved from science to philosophy such as Richard Dawkins. Thus, many scientists recognize the limited nature of their work; they are not seeking to make claims about everything much less about God. They are trying to understand how the various aspects of our world intersect and operate.”
Like most public consumption articles in the sciences, it seems critical to go to the primary literature to get the full story. In context, the sense in which Dawkins “does not represent all scientists” is stating the fact that not all scientists are atheists. This seems to be indisputably true.
The quote about Dawkins and Westboro is not equating the two as morally equivalent. Rather, they are saying that it is unfair to presume all scientists are anti-religious atheists. The comparison to Westboro makes sense to them, because they feel the media has unfairly painted all Christians like Westboro. This comparison might have made sense in the context of their internal conversation, but it does not translate the public context of the WIRED article.
Personally, I would not have put that quote in the WIRED article. It creates the false impression that Dawkins and Westboro are morally equivalent, when they certainly are not.
The larger picture I see in these quotes is that they are encourage their denomination to take seriously the findings of science. In my work with AAAS, I did not promote any specific theological viewpoint, but focused on explaining the best science in an understandable way. This seems to be precisely the mission of the AAAS, to promote public understanding of science, including evolutionary science.