Mythology and Belief of Anti-Theism

The problem with "fundamentalist" is that it comes with too much baggage. It is often a pejorative that is used without any historical context or knowledge of the theologies it refers to. One common thread amongst fundamentalist theologies is a rejection of Modernism and Secularism. I don't see "fundamentalist atheism" adhering to these doctrines.Perhaps "strident" or "dogmatic" would be closer to what you are looking for?More to the point, atheists do agree that claims of theism need to be backed by evidence. Cynical atheists may very well point to the thousands of years that theists have failed to do just this and then conclude that there probably isn't a deity of any kind. "Weak" atheists may be open to the idea that such evidence could still exist, even though it appears quite unlikely. However, the fundamental argument is a lack of evidence for theistic claims. Is this the fundamental argument you are talking about?

Since atheists tend to enjoy being the fly in the ointment, the real deal is why do these two questions have more importance than "does an invisible dragon live in my garage, or do invisible garage dragons not exist?". Why is the God Question given more importance than every other imagined creature from myth and human imagination for which there is equal evidence? Does your rejection of invisible garage dragons make you a fundamentalist atheist?IOW, why is the God Question given special treatment?Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

From my experience, the only difference between agnosticism and atheism is that there is less perceived social stigma with calling yourself an agnostic. As far as arguments, there is no difference between the two. If a 100 foot tall Zeus came down from Mt. Olympus and walked the breadth of the Earth for a period of 5 years no agnostic would be indecisive about whether or not there is a god, and neither would the atheist. Just ask an agnostic if they have a positive belief in any of the gods described by man. If they answer no then tell them to join the atheists.Edited by Taq, : No reason given.

It wouldn't take long to find atheists that fit this description. A scan of a few articles at HuffPo would probably turn up a few. I wouldn't doubt that you could find an atheist that praises the curative powers of homeopathy. I really enjoy reading the articles at Pharyngula. This isn't because I agree with everthing that PZ says. I just find it entertaining. PZ walks a fine line between atheism and the strident anti-theist you are talking about. Sometimes he brazenly blows right past the line (which is why I find it entertaining). At the same time, he can be quite reasonable and even admit where his arguments could be flawed.Can atheists be unreasonable and completely wrong on certain subjects? Well, yeah. Atheists are also human. Ego, emotional investment, defensiveness, . . . you know, our human flaws. Like anything, each and every claim needs to be judged by the evidence, not by who says it. Einstein got Relativity right, but his dogmatic position with respect to a Steady State universe did more harm than good as one example.