Richard Dawkins says "What if you're wrong?"

[Purple Rabbit]

Which was my point to begin with?

Don't know. What is your point?

Secondly, being right on existence can coexist with being wrong on the moral clause. Consistency of moral statements can be evaluated independently from the existence clause. This is why it is easier to reject most theisms on basis of the morals they present.

My whole point was that consistency of moral statements is independant of a religions truth. I don't understand what you're trying to say.

I'm making a statement that differs from yours. Even if god exists, I see no reason for the worshipping part.