There's some links on YouTube of Hitchens discussing his book in a public forum - quite good, imo:
I've got the audio version of the book and he discusses the contemptible behaviour that compels people to commit cruelty against their children in the name of God, not the least of which is male and female circumcision. Here's an excerpt, with apologies for errors in paragraphing from the original text, considering the audio version is the source of the transcription:
Parents professing to believe in the nonsensical claims of Christian Science have been accused, but not always convicted, of denying urgent medical care to their offspring. Parents who imagine themselves to be Jehovah's Witnesses have refused permission for their children to receive blood transfusions. Parents who imagine that a man named Joseph Smith was led to a set of buried golden tablets have married their underaged Mormon daughters to favored uncles and brothers-in-law, who sometimes have older wives already. The Shia fundamentalists in Iran lowered the age of consent to 9, perhaps in admiring emulation of the age of the youngest wife of the prophet Mohammed. Hindu child brides in India are flogged and sometimes burned alive if the pathetic dowry they bring is judged to be too small. The Vatican and its vast network of dioceses has, in the past decade alone, been forced to admit complicity in a huge racket of child rape and child torture, mainly but by no means exclusively homosexual, in which known pederasts and sadists were shielded from the law and reassigned to parishes where the pickings of the innocent and defenseless were often richer. In Ireland alone, once an unquestioning disciple of Holy Mother Church, it is now estimated that the unmolested children of religious schools were very probably the minority.
Now religion professes a special role in the protection and instruction of children. "Woe to him," says the Grand Inquisitor in Dovstoyevsky's The Brothers Karamazov, "who harms a child." The New Testament has Jesus informing us that one so guilty would be better off at the bottom of the sea, and with a millstone around his neck at that. But in theory and in practice, religion uses the innocent and the defenseless for the purposes of experiment.
By all means, let an observant Jewish male have his raw, cut penis placed in the mouth of a rabbi. That would be legal, at least in New York. By all means, let grown up women who distrust their clitoris or their labia have them sawn away by some other wretched adult female. By all means, let Abraham offer to commit suicide to prove his devotion to the Lord or to prove his belief in the voices he was hearing in his head. By all means, let devout parents deny themselves the succor of medicine when in acute pain and distress. By all means, for all I care, let a priest sworn to celibacy be a promiscuous homosexual. By all means, let a congregation that believes in whipping out the devil choose a new grown up sinner each week and lash him until he or she bleeds. By all means, let anyone who believes in creationism instruct his fellows during lunch break. But to the conscription of the unprotected child for these purposes is something that even the most dedicated secularist can safely describe as a sin.
