All right, so objections to it from the likes of the National Secular Society are a bit like demands from the Football Association that the cricket season be cancelled.
But when I think about it, I can’t see why atheist, agnostic, humanist and similar voices should not be heard on it. Buddhists, after all, already are. And the present situation is based on the wholly fallacious supposition that secular humanism is a neutral background rather than a position in itself.
The more exposure of just what A C Grayling’s beloved Classical philosophy really reads like when still unrecapitulated in Christ and His Church, or of just what his beloved “Enlightenment” philosophy really reads like when not subjected to any Christian critique (not least with regard to its own roots), the better from Christianity’s point of view.
The real question about Thought for the Day is that of where its contributors to come from. They rarely hold all that senior a position, and they were very seldom well-known beforehand.