God.....again.

"Atheists" covers and awful lot of people so this is only my answer.I, for one, am not always talking about him. Doesn't usually enter my mind at all on a day to day basis.However, you may be going on what is posted here. Since one side of the discussion has some fixation of god that is bound to be all over the posts here.There are, of course, some atheists who are militant about it. Why they are probably is as variable as the personalities involved. Don't start to generalize that is a big mistake.

LOL, that is the definition of atheists so by definition they do.and yes, I agree that there isn't proof that God doesn't exist so you have to make a sort of leap of faith to conclude that.Agnosticism is the only evidence based place where someone can arrive.However, lack of evidence one way or the other is hardly a good reason for concluding that something exists. So the jump from agnosticism to atheism isn't all that great.

MiquelYou are bringing up what is called the anthropic principle. Google it and you will find all the discussions of the topic you could ask for.Generally it seems the philosophical discussions don't really arrive anywhere so it might not be worth discussing.It is my view that we don't know enough yet. It may be that the nature of, well, nature is such that only this universe is possible. Another possibility is that lots of universes are possible and exist, in which case we are just in one of them.

Uh, we seem to be discussing the meaning of a word here so, of course, it is a semantic argument.I see in Rrhain's "hairsplitting" distinction a real point. For some atheists (but of course some are more militant) it is a huge non-issue. It is a matter of "no belief" rather than a belief of any sort.