Look, let's try and go back to the original point. One group of deluded fools leaves another to join a third, none of the three groups ever showing any particular desire to move towards rationality. From the point of view of any coherent atheist, this would mean precisely nothing. Speaking as an enemy of Communism - to make a comparison - I find the historical break of the Albanian Communists from Russia to Mao's China eminently uninteresting, and certainly would not have bothered, at the time, posting a frothing denuncation of Mao for poaching outside his preserve. Now, Dawkins' only standing in this issue - that is, the only reason why his view should matter any more than mine and yours and Wino John's down at the corner, and why the Washington Post should waste ink and dead trees over them - is his position as champion of atheism and professor emeritus of the public understanding of science. He takes a position on what, for a coherent atheist, is not an issue at all, and shows that his real reason for it is sexual-political - which, again, has nothing to do with atheism. You would find plenty of Tantric heretics in various religions, not excluding even Christianity, who find God in sex. I would say that his credit as a coherent atheist is completely spent.

Incidentally, I already posted long ago about the absurd itch of certain unbelievers to set themselves up as judges of Christian doctrine: http://fpb.livejournal.com/138154.html - with an apology that arises from an error in its text: http://fpb.livejournal.com/138459.html