Where Dawkins is Wrong

Oliver Kamm writes about secularism in The Times and concludes with an observation on Dawkins' call for a kind of Atheist political movement:

"I do not wish to see, and will not sign up to, an organised interest group of atheists, because atheism is a private belief, of no civic significance. So is religious belief."

While I have always enjoyed Richard Dawkins' work, they are undoubtedly the work of a, incredibly well-read, scientist. Not a politician.

So I always squirmed a little bit when I would read his comparisons of the nascent atheist populations of America to the struggle of it's homosexual population, and the need for an Atheists Rights movements along the lines of the Gay Rights movement.

For what would an Atheist in America or Europe struggle toward? The right not to have to look at a Hijab? The right not to have to listen to a red-faced, podium-thumping preacher? Or would Dawkins' movement be a proscriptive one? Denying the religious the right to 'brainwash' their kids?

I'm not a big fan of proscriptive movements, and my hostility to religion has nothing to do with politics.