"True, natural selection, or change within species, is a given. It is making the leap to macro evolution that takes faith. Macro is not provable, observable, or falsifiable. "
Ok, so change within a species is a given. Speciation would then be macroevolution? Macoevolution occurs then, because we have observed speciation on many occasions.
"Neither is special creation, both have to be taken on faith."
To start, the origin of life is not part of evolutionary theory. Special creation is actually not comparable to it until you get to where biodiversity comes from. For that we do have evidence that change -between- species has occurred, and we have evidence that change between -classes- has occurred. These things, if they occur as we predict, will be observable eventually, so long as our species doesn't annihilate itself. In the meantime, it's a choice between the stronger evidence. "Macroevolution" has that, while "special creation" does not, making the latter about faith and the former about evidence. The other thing is our take on evolution is subject to change as better evidence becomes available, as hypotheses are supported or falsified. This is a good thing, since science corrects itself as more knowledge becomes available.
"What is interesting is, Darwin himself said that hundreds, if not thousands, of transitional fossils should be found if his theory was correct, yet none have."
Define "transitional fossil".
"Darwin, like any scientist, took what he observed and tried to apply it to what was unobservable in an attempt to explain the unknown. He is to be commended. It just didn't pan out."
Which is why his idea of natural selection doesn't apply to the real world today. . . .
"Unfortunately, those who dogmatically refuse to consider special creation or any other theory hi-jacked poor Darwin's theory and stretched it to fit their needs."
Notice how I already mentioned science is self correcting. He got some things right, and others wrong. Scientists tear each others' work apart all the time to make sure it really holds up. If it holds up we keep working on it, and over time we learn the things we need to make a theory stronger.
"They have taught it religiously in schools as fact."
Evolution = change over time. This is a fact. It is not religious at all. Evolutionary theory is an explanation of how that fact occurs. Unfortunately most people confuse this with abiogenesis (though we have some evidence for that too).
"Now that thinking people are questioning the credibility of this theory, evolutionists fling accusations of blind faith at the opposition, completely overlooking their own near-sighted dogmatism."
If these people are "thinking people" they have some serious flaws in their thinking, like refusing to look at evidence presented to them, conflating different fields of study and changing definitions on us. We keep trying to explain to you that evolutionary theory, like all science, is not dogmatic, because being dogmatic is "characterized by assertion of unproved or unprovable principles" or "stubbornly adhering to insufficiently proven beliefs; inflexible, rigid" and science changes all the time to reflect new information, and drop old information if we find it's actually not true all the time. (Definitions from google search.)