The only reason why I describe my criticism of Dawkins here is that his name is mentioned in the OP. I agree that there are other dangers to society and intellectual integrity, many of them worse.

Tickling believers' insecurities: Tickling religious communities can have a healthy effect, if a genuine discussion arises. However, many will react by spitefully closing ranks, further inhibiting self-reflexion, and styling themselves as heroes or martyrs. Some ("militant") atheists may welcome this, hoping that it will then be even easier to expose religion and fight the Final Battle. This strategy is extremely risky, since the ideals of freedom and rationality are likely to be sacrificed in order to defend them. See the history of the "war on Islamic terrorism" for warning signals.

Moral compass: It is empirically evident that (self-declared) religious and non-religious people can do acts of altruism and commit crimes. Often all four combinations can be observed in the life of a single person. The question for reasons is extremely difficult, deeply rooted in human nature. Studying this is normally shunned by ideologists, since they feel it would weaken their position. Some of them resort to "divine grace", others to "enlightenment" etc., neither notion explaining anything.

Generally, intellectuals tend to overestimate the influence of verbal reflexion on humans, even on "highly intelligent" ones.