I see your point. However, the neo-religious movement loves shouting match, because shouting matches convey only simplistic messages. Pro-sanity activists cannot rely on simplistic arguments, since that would be the very antithesis of sanity. Besides, the main battlefield is not the traditional political arena - we must fight the battle there as well, and there the Dawkins approach may be needed, but the main battlefront is the litterature. People read. If they don't read, then we need to get on BoEs and damn well teach them to read. People even read books that offer views that are tangential to their own beliefs if the main story is good enough. If we can get our people into the litterary mainstream and isolate the neo-barbs as wingnuts or paint them as ideolouges, we can gradually push the boundries of what is 'acceptable' in litterature and what is 'mainstream' in litterature. But it has to be subtle. People reject political creeds, but if you have a fictional country with a fictional political system that bears little resemblance to your own country and political system, you can use it to broach ideas such as institutional transparency and secularity.
It has been done before. It can be done again.