I just read the first chapter of The God Delusion, and I think I have a lot more in common with your cause then I previously thought. My initial problem with the Dawkinists came when I first encountered their groups online. I read many of them saying that religion is inherently wrong, and everyone with a religion is stupid, gullible, or delusional. I took offense to this because I consider myself very religious, who finds wisdom in and inspiration in every religion I've ever encountered, who strives to follow the Tao, and puts all these teachings together in a Buddhist framework. Although these types of groups said they were against all religion, none of their criticisms applied at all to me. This led me to presume great ignorance on their part: Either they are unaware of the teachings of Lao-tzu and Buddha, or they don't consider it really religion because it doesn't fit a narrow Judeo-Christian mold. What Lao-tzu and Buddha taught were guides to living a life of virtue while having a profound understand of the world. Just because it doesn't fit the Western religious views that came into existence centuries later doesn't make them any less religious. So I came to an assumption that religious crack pots and Dawkinists are both wrong and for essentially the same reasons: they both insist they are right and everyone else is wrong, too egocentric to realize that even the wisest among men doesn't know everything. And they both use their misguided self-righteous beliefs to spread oppression and ignorance, ironically two things every religion and every intellectual agree are wrong. Then I actually started to read Dawkins book. As it turns out Dawkins doesn't have really anything bad to say about religion in general. His opinion is that their is something seriously wrong with people believing in the supernatural. That's an opinion I totally agree with. Belief in the supernatural is a problem with many religions (not all of them: Buddha's and Lao-tzu's teachings avoid any mention of the supernatural). And the way Dawkins uses observation and reason to reach a profound understanding of the world: His behavior seems very Buddhist to me. Perhaps a lot of the atheists today are actually Buddhists, they just haven't taken the time to read about it to realize that it fits their beliefs all along, that Buddhism can offer them insight and wisdom without in anyway conflicting with what they already know is true. So I'm not sure what I'm entirely getting at here. I agree with everything I've read by Dawkins so far. But I doubt you can effectively stop the belief in the supernatural by declaring war on religion, because first of all not all religions believe in the supernatural. Secondly, the part of religion that benefits humanity (community, charity, compassion, wisdom) are not inherently bound to a literal interpretation of the supernatural. So I think you could win a lot of support for your cause by not forcing people to give up their religion in morals and practice, but get them to admit that the supernatural part come from another time and should no longer be taken literally (which I suspect many people are already inclined to view their religion this way.) And thirdly, stopping religion isn't going to make people any smarter or less inclined to believe in the supernatural. Plenty of non-religious people still believe in alien abductions, astrology, and magic bullet conspiracy theories, not to mention what they see on TV and read in the newspapers. Getting rid of religion isn't going to make people smarter, or less inclined to believe whatever crap someone is willing to tell them. Changing the whole social paradigm to make everyone a vehemently anti-religious isn't likely to ever work. And even if it could work, I don't think it's really going to help anyone, stop wars, ignorance, oppression, or make the world a better place. The people themselves won't be better, so they would just find some excuse to oppress one another. But if you got everyone to turn Taoist, I think that would have a much better chance of solving the world's problems (I've never heard of anyone successfully turning the Tao into a tool of oppression, but you never know)