Its not a new concept - Blaise Pascal is often quoted
"
“There is a God shaped vacuum in the heart of every man which cannot be filled by any created thing, but only by God, the Creator, made known through Jesus.”"
Back in the 1600s
This is the same man that came up with Pascals Wager - which can be reduced to the idea that, given we are talking about eternity, and that no one can know whether god/ afterlife exists or not, it makes more sense, rationally speaking, to live as if you believe in god than not.
So the idea of a god =shaped hole is not a new one, but it does sound catchy - there is even a band called god-shaped hole I believe, and the idea does sound attractive to those with religion who seek explanations or reasons for faith.
But I would reject both of Pascals propositions - the fundamental weakness of pascals wager has been well demonstrated before.
Likewise, I would reject the notion that all people are programmed to worship something, and certainly there is little or no evidence to support the notion.
It can be fairly said that humans are a curious species, and one driven to find a narrative to explain the world around them. It can also be demonstrated that, during our development phase, as babies and children, our critical faculties are in suspension, and tend to believe pretty much whatever we are told- but that is most definitely not the same thing ass having, by design, a vacuum that only god can fill.
And for this very reason - the credulity of children - it is important that we do not fill them up with superstitious nonsense, because of this lack of criticical filtering.
You might argue that this does not explain devout converts who are adult, come late in life and seeking god - but usually their desire to seek this higher truth stems from a real world trauma of some description that they feel unable to handle.
So no, I reject this notion of yours - it is unproven and does not bear close scrutiny.And on a more trivial point - When you look at topics and threads opened in this section that are up for discussion, you will not see many that start with the implied desire to tell a cosy little homily about atheism, or that recite a particular chapter from, say Dawkins book. What you goodlife will frequently see is people responding to your topics, which are designed to "spread the word of god", rebutting some of the more obviously false statements, and questioning the source of your cut and paste efforts.
You might also see some posts started that are critical of religion - I have started posts myself using a news story that illustrates that stupidity, or venality, or evil of a particular act carried out in gods name - but that is certainly not the same thing as preaching for atheism.
So you can rest aasured goodlife - as long as you post, there will be plenty of people listening and willing to jump in and point our where you are being intellectually dishonest, or where your religious teachings and belief are at odds with the evidence or with humanity.
Isnt that reassuring?