Well, if most Christian are truly theocracy fans, wanting to subvert the culture through the education system, then no, vouchers won't do much to make the war go away (although it would make sure that fewer students are affected by it).

But its not really about most christians; the problems are often created by people who are homeschooling their own kids but run with a hidden agenda to get elected to the school board in order to save everyone else's kids. When their agenda is revealed, the majority often vote them out of office, as occurred in Kansas and most recently in Dover.

"I'm inclined to think that vouchers aren't a bad idea; I'm not sure, however, that it would end creationists' attempts to insert pseudoscience into the public schools, unless public schools were abolished entirely."

Well, if most Christian are truly theocracy fans, wanting to subvert the culture through the education system, then no, vouchers won't do much to make the war go away (although it would make sure that fewer students are affected by it). But here's a different possibility: Christian parents have no more aspirations about cultural renewal than the average parent. They just want their kids to be prepared for whatever life throws at them, and are trying to instill their own values in them (you know, upbringing). With schools taking a hand in upbringing, telling students what to think about racism and homosexuality, many parents understandably want to have an influence on what is taught. Not because they want to control what other people's children are taught, but simply because they don't want others controling what their children are taught. Making it easier for these parents to send their children to a private school with values more to their liking will probably remove a lot of the incentive to influence the local public school.

These are the kind of conflicts that arise when you have a single system to which everyone is compelled to pay:

I'm inclined to think that vouchers aren't a bad idea; I'm not sure, however, that it would end creationists' attempts to insert pseudoscience into the public schools, unless public schools were abolished entirely. And thats not a position that I think will win a majority of voters.

"This quotation is from an article by a conservative Christian. Even if we assume that it is completely accurate,"

From the conference schedule, we learn that included were talks with such titles as: "The Real Hidden Religious Agenda: The Theocratic States of America", "Is an Unholy American Theocracy Here?", "On the Psychology and Theocracy of George W. Bush", and "Christian Jihad". I see no reason to doubt the accuracy of that quotation.

"note that the professor only compared the "zeal" of the two groups. He did not say members of the Christian Right were suicide bombers."

In the same vein, Coulter only said that the Jersey widows enjoyed their husbands deaths, not that they themselves flew the planes into the building. IOW, this is a meaningless distinction.

"When abortion clinics were bombed, or doctors were targeted for assasination, much the same motive was behind it."

Had the professor compared suicide bombers to abortion clinic bombers, I would have agreed. But the comparison was made between suicide bombers and the Christian Right. Unless you're be arguing that the Religious Right at large can be considered to be potential abortion clinic bombers, I think you're missing the point.

"Meanwhile, although it's clear to every conservative media outlet that Coulter is more of an embarrassment than an asset, Dembski continues to think otherwise. Though it doesn't make me want to be a suicide bomber, I wouldn't mind slapping him on the side of the head once or twice, and shouting, "Wake up, idiot!""

I think it's obvious that Dembski too likes controversy for the sake of controversy - making DaveScott "blog tzar" sure was a… erhm, "controversial" decision. The difference between him and Coulter is that she makes more money doing it.

An associate professor of comparative studies equated the zeal of the "Christian Right" with that of "suicide bombers."

This quotation is from an article by a conservative Christian. Even if we assume that it is completely accurate, note that the professor only compared the "zeal" of the two groups. He did not say members of the Christian Right were suicide bombers. Now why is a suicide bomber a suicide bomber? Because he has no other effective way of eliminating his opposition and making a point. When abortion clinics were bombed, or doctors were targeted for assasination, much the same motive was behind it. Now that the Christian Right has one of their own in the White House, they have other means of eliminating their opposition.

Meanwhile, although it's clear to every conservative media outlet that Coulter is more of an embarrassment than an asset, Dembski continues to think otherwise. Though it doesn't make me want to be a suicide bomber, I wouldn't mind slapping him on the side of the head once or twice, and shouting, "Wake up, idiot!"