While I do not know about the appropriateness of exposing Children to fire and brimstone sermons on a daily or even weekly basis, note that Dawkins makes a sweeping statement about all of Christianity.

This is hardly a major plank of his general argument (critics hunt around for excuses for attack), but, for the record, his point about labelling children applies to all religions.

This derives from the puritan ethic, in a non-religious sense, the striving for purity, and I see quite a bit of that in Dawkins' expression of atheism.

Easy to allege, again, this would carry some weight if you actually gave some (one) examples. There's a difference between purity and clarity or trying to argue consistently. But - if that's what you're reduced to trying to pick on ... :-)

Religion is, by and large, inertia.

And various things can jerk them out of it - including books,  even very challenging ones - see the feedback on his site.

Maybe it's because I'm a Londoner - that I moved to Nice.