The Invisible Line of Objectivity

Recently I have been challenged with the idea of objectivity, and how close its relationship is to the dividing line.
I covered a lecture by a world known Evolutionary Biologist, whose beliefs and teachings I did not even remotely agree with. Richard Dawkins is a very opinionated British man, that has no problem stating his case, and fighting it to the death, was the impression that I took from the encounter.
I am transparently a devoted creationist; and it seems this title, as not so subtly defined by Dawkins in his talks, is a derogatory name for an ignorant person. Dawson numerously name called creationists and their beliefs-all of them.
Reporting on this controversial subject
Listening to his lectures I couldn’t help but leave slightly amused, and puzzled by the view of the atheist. It was when I began to sit down and write that I realized by perspective would undoubtedly interfere with my reporting.
Normally covering a story that I have an opinion about could be easily taken-up by another writer, but in that situation I was the writer for the story and it had to be done.
Who else, than a faithful creationist, to give perspective to the story that would it give it credence? Religion, like that of other poll margin issues, is of the greatest importance to a majority of Americans, and definitely to the rest of the world. It had made sense to me finally, that if topics such as religious beliefs, sexual preference, social standings, abortion, and other serious controversial floating politics can not be discussed in a realistic forum in the news medium, the supposed objective form of journalism, than there is no other place for them.
With this in mind, I decided that my presuppositions of Dawkins were allowed. He was a representation of the people in all parts of the world with his same viewpoint, and I was the representative for the other half, and together giving into this bias openly, I could then become as impartial as possible and tell the Ka Leo audience, whom I guessed in this story would be attendees and would-be attendees to the lecture, the newsworthiness of the event, with my thoughts aside.
On a more personal note, I don’t think Dawkins thought much of me. I was kind casual and informal in my interview with him, I cant really help the style that I have developed here in Hawaii, and I think it scared him slightly considering his typical interviewees are professional journalists for large-scale newspapers. I came to this conclusion when he told me blatantly to ask him a more “sensible question.” Sensible. Haha! A word choice only a British would do, and hearing this made me laugh. Opps.