Next attempt.. Sorry.

Some people are missing the point here. As ever, go back to the OP and see what our nautical friend had to say. He put forward an idea that those who knock religions are just expounding a different religion. As a statement, I could say that I might agree with the idea that there are organisations putting forward an alternative to having to equate morals with superstition. The British Secular Society and The Humanist Organisation spring to mind, and I am sure that what we read of atheist churches and services etc in the more silly end of the Western world do no more than reinfoce the view that atheism is a creed.

However, and to repeat repeats... Atheism is not a title with a strict defining fence. I can say I am atheist and mean one thing and you can read into that something entirely different. For instance, I say there is no evidence that the metaphysical side of religions have any basis beyond superstition and therefore, I have no interest in the whole concept. Someone reading that might assume I am categorically saying there is no God. After all, that's what "atheists" think eh?

There is no more evidence for God than there is a lack of God. The evidence for refuting many things ascribed to a God is another matter. No. Flying carpets, creatures in his image, rising from the dead, seven days to make a planet, causing natural disasters by intervention, impregnation of a human by mythical creatures with wings, tablets of stone with writing on them that was not written by a human, parting the sea, burning bushes, bringing down stone walls with a single horn, a wonam being turned into a pillar of salt.... Sorry, my knowldege of the bible is little and then goes back to childhood to recall the above, but there is as much evidence within the demonstrable laws of physics , let alone probability, to dismiss such things out of hand.

Many people who profess a faith seem to agree that these are parables to encourage debate and soul searching. Fine. In which case, why not spend as much effort disowning or at least reining in those who make you look idiots by their literal approach as you do trying to ridicule and brow beat those who dismiss it all as medeivel curiosity?

the issue is; regardless of the country you are in whilst reading this, there are people trying to influence government to allow and promote forms of hatred, bigotry and suppression of discovery of knowledge on the basis that their hold on society is weakening, and in the immortal words of Corporal Jones, the fuzzy wuzzies don't like it up 'em.