Recidivism, eh searcherman.... interesting approach... I can see the line of attack quite clearly now...
Here's a quote from Nietzsche:
"The criminal and what is related to him. — The criminal type is the type of the strong human being under unfavorable circumstances: a strong human being made sick. He lacks the wilderness, a somehow freer and more dangerous environment and form of existence, where everything that is weapons and armor in the instinct of the strong human being has its rightful place. His virtues are ostracized by society; the most vivid drives with which he is endowed soon grow together with the depressing affects — with suspicion, fear, and dishonor. Yet this is almost the recipe for physiological degeneration. Whoever must do secretly, with long suspense, caution, and cunning, what he can do best and would like most to do, becomes anemic; and because he always harvests only danger, persecution, and calamity from his instincts, his attitude to these instincts is reversed too, and he comes to experience them fatalistically. It is society, our tame, mediocre, emasculated society, in which a natural human being, who comes from the mountains or from the adventures of the sea, necessarily degenerates into a criminal. Or almost necessarily; for there are cases in which such a man proves stronger than society: the Corsican, Napoleon, is the most famous case."
The bold underlined portion of the quote is the important bit... it would appear then, that the whole point of the work would be to say that for a criminal being under unfavorable circumstances...is to say that the unfavourable circumstances is "religion"....and this is what is making him sick...
Still sounds like New Atheism to me...
By the way, Lindsay's book entitled Everybody Is Wrong About God is a very bad title... for one thing it is an empirical proposition...for the other it uses the word "Everybody", i.e. All people....
Now, CFI uses the writings of J S Mill a lot to point out how one should "critically think"... problem is... Mill would say to Lindsay that with this title... he is showing little critical thinking... because the title is completely meaningless because it is incomplete...
Check out Mills ideas concerning epistemological propositions using "All" qualifiers... and you will see the problem... for me this would suggest that if the title is "incomplete" the ideas contained therein will also be "incomplete".... sounds like a bad book...