I don't believe crossed fingers or lucky socks are posing a significant threat to anyone at the moment. In fact, these behaviours may well have rational purposes behind them:
Professional athletes are notoriously superstitious. A "Lucky" bat/pair of skates/helmet, or the absence of such objects has a psychological effect on the athlete, which is likely to translate into a change in performance. But for these effects to continue (which would often be favourable), the athlete must remain confident in and even loyal to their superstition. This is the reason for their more unusual applications of these beliefs. For example, if one found that crossing one's fingers before going to bat yielded better results, one might feel obliged to stand by the belief at times when it can have no foreseeable logical effects (on the current situation), such as if a family member were ill.
Although it may be possible to talk people out of this sort of thing, from my experience people wouldn't be as quick to discard something more deeply ingrained like organized religion (which practically defines peoples' beliefs on some of the hot-button issues you mentioned).
As for the "scam artists", I admittedly don't have the experience to comment on the legitimacy of each one's profession, but assuming you're right, I'd still be willing to wager that these professions won't be driven out of existence by Richard Dawkins.
That's how it looks to me, anyway.
Professional athletes are notoriously superstitious. A "Lucky" bat/pair of skates/helmet, or the absence of such objects has a psychological effect on the athlete, which is likely to translate into a change in performance. But for these effects to continue (which would often be favourable), the athlete must remain confident in and even loyal to their superstition. This is the reason for their more unusual applications of these beliefs. For example, if one found that crossing one's fingers before going to bat yielded better results, one might feel obliged to stand by the belief at times when it can have no foreseeable logical effects (on the current situation), such as if a family member were ill.
Although it may be possible to talk people out of this sort of thing, from my experience people wouldn't be as quick to discard something more deeply ingrained like organized religion (which practically defines peoples' beliefs on some of the hot-button issues you mentioned).
As for the "scam artists", I admittedly don't have the experience to comment on the legitimacy of each one's profession, but assuming you're right, I'd still be willing to wager that these professions won't be driven out of existence by Richard Dawkins.
That's how it looks to me, anyway.