No doubt all good points. But the fact is, you have to tune and verify via the Morse or voice identifier a VOR frequency just like you have to input and verify a waypoint. You have no less responsibility to assure one than the other.
Has anyone ever flown into a mountain because the tuned up the wrong VOR? Bunches of times. In fact, so many times that they have changed one of the VORs in Arkansas to RICH MOUNTAIN so that you would think about the terrain.
I have terrain avoidance awareness now that is 100X better than what I had before (me with a map and flying a plan with an MEA). I also have the Mode S traffic in areas where it is offered. Does that relieve me of having to look out the window for VFR traffic? No, but it sure makes it easier to find those Mooneys and it is way nice to know how many 150s there are in the pattern at DWH when the tower shuts down at 10pm.
The point of this whole discussion is steam gauges vs glass cockpit and the arrival of new technology that is destin to improve situation awareness, navigation, IMC operations and the like. Statistically, does the Cirrus crash because of the G1000 or because you can go buy one and fly it with a newly minted pilots license? I think people are wanting to bypass the "time building" phase of their flying career and unfortunatly, this is precisely where you learn to avoid all those pitfalls in a much more forgiving venue.
My statement about getting someone lost with a VOR was a reply to Jon's comment. My answer is around the hypothetical position that if you lost power (nav, comm, etc.) and were flying on partial panel in an area of the country that you were unfamiliar with, a GPS with a battery might just save your life. Or at least the odds are better that the landing you are about to make is one you can walk away from. Having suffered both an inflight vacuum pump failure and an alternator / power failure, I am keenly aware of the need for partial panel ability.
But I never have to look at a paper map with two VORs tuned in to know where I am. My plane never had DME until I got the GPS(s). Did the old timers howl when DME came about and you didn't have to cross check and calculate where you were? How about when they had to have a navigator and they took star readings? Which would you rather shoot, an ADF approach or a GPS/RNAV approach? The magenta line is the same as the OBS needle. If the little plane stays on the line or the needle stays inbetween the dots what does it matter? Except my GPS also has an OBS with dots as well. I can bracket for the wind or fly until the course and heading number are the same. For me, the latter is easier than the former.
The underlying point is, does technology making flying safer and more enjoyable rather than causing us to rely on tools that are not as efficient nor as reliable? My response is yes. The pretty picture that inclues, weather, terrain, course, objective and relative position is better than a map neatly folded in my lap while I am dialing up Flight Watch to find out what lies ahead.