I have made a huge mistake in responding to this post. It can only lead to more ignorant rancor.

I don't agree that any NPR editor is more qualified than me or anyone else on this site, in fact many on this site are much better at analysis than the soundbites offered on NPR which is characteristic of the lack of honest journalism these days.

This authoritarian appraisal betrays the problem that religion has today. The hierarchical
aspect of Christianity is so evident that many young people are justified in turning away from it. Their leaders have failed them by posing as somehow superior to others and laying out repressive edicts and hypocritical rules.

The founders as anyone else of an organization can call it what they want even if their terminology is ambiguous.

It is not clear that there is a "mainstream atheist movement" as you say. There are many divergent points of view about what constitutes non-belief and no one has a corner on that market. The so-called "mainstream atheist view" is merely an attempt to discredit non-belief by throwing everyone who dissents from religion into the same category.

I also disagree that there are any definitions accepted in the so-called "larger world" but that these definitions that you mention, depending on what they are, tend toward disseminating propaganda rather than revealing any useful information about religion.

I do not feel inclined to accept these "so-called" definitions.