Fortunately, yes. And unfortunately as well, not to forget. Historically we've had a bout with an acute form of this attitude enough to set up chapters of skeptics anonymous. All the -isms, including environmentalism and dogmatism have that penchant for delegitimizing the uncomfortable questions, including the god question. Those familiar with intellectual history since Kant who began his blast against the endless religious dogmatic bickering will see how that reaction ended up making gods out of other things. Step by step, from then to Nietzsche down to Foucault and then landing in the distaste of a two cruel World Wars, we throw out the baby and the bathwater to grasp after an order in the shroud of a purported chaos theory. It's Charlie Chaplin on the moon, and insufficient for political theory.
I don't see as much downside in scientific critical thinking as you do apparently. I don't blame modern wars on such thinking. There were enough attrocities from both sides during the European wars of religion. Then again, this period of 16th and 17th century history could be argued to be the result of people questioning authority and questioning what they'd been taught. However, I think we are all the freer as a result of the efforts and moral courage of those who thought for themselves.
Ah, it has been a long, long time since I struggled through Kant, Hegel, Nietzsche, Kierkegaard, Dostoevsky, etc. You seem to be arguing like Dostoevsky's Grand Inquisitor, "Oh, ages are yet to come of the confusion of free thought, of their science and cannibalism. For having begun to build their tower of Babel without us, they will end, of course, with cannibalism. But then the beast will crawl to us and lick our feet and spatter them with tears of blood. And we shall sit upon the beast and raise the cup, and on it will be written, "Mystery." But then, and only then, the reign of peace and happiness will come for men."