Quote Originally Posted by Polymirize
Oh so prim and proper Dev...
Are you just convinced that my tendencies toward analytical explanations means I have no explorative philisophical side Polymerize? I wanted to explain atheism, so i did.

Come on now. I've yet to meet an atheist who didn't think absence of evidence wasn't equivalent to evidence of absence.
There are plenty of atheists who believe this indeed, which is why i specified proper atheism rather than the somewhat illogical brand you described above.

But most atheists tend to stop talking to me when I point out the similarities between their beliefs and those of practicing catholics.
If you mean in regard to a devoted belief in the existence or non-existence of god, the similarities are of course there. But please keep in mind that to be atheistic, sometimes just means a person (like myself) doesn't like to be theistic, but rather philisophical and constantly questioning and trying to understand. Am I to be inseparably percieved in the light cast by other atheists?

Does atheism define the atheist? Or do the atheists define atheism?

A little of both I suppose. Personally, I like to define the atheism. But my atheism primarily extends to a non-belief in dieties. That doesn't mean I reject everything not found in a school textbook.