Well, sure if the topic is defining atheism, obviously I agree. But if we are looking at what is in many ways a paradigmatic conflict, there are two believe systems clashing. If the theist is trying to argue that atheism is a belief or that all atheists have the same belief system they are wrong. But if we take the most vocal atheists: Dawkins, Harris, etc. and the people who get into arguments with theists as atheists online - iow where the argument/discussion/tension is, we are meeting two groups that have tendencies towards a certain belief system.
I guess my reaction is sure, we can be precise and we should be, but not alone, because the rise of the new atheism, the active one, the one that theists are going to hear about, the atheists the theists will see in the new and online, in general, share much of a system of beliefs in common and often their lack of belief arises or is correlated with these other beliefs. We can be, yes, just pedantic and point out that there are atheists who paradigmatically share little with this group. But I think in the name of charitable interpretation and response, we can ALSO say that, yes, the atheists you are most likely to find slashing your beliefs in books, articles, youtube videos share a belief system, to a great degree. Obviously they have differences, even in that group, as do theists, a group that includes obviously a very wide range of theism outside the already quite variable Christianity.
It’s not a coincidence that many new atheists have some general philosophical ideas in common. The lack of belief correlates with certain beliefs.
Everyone can acknowledge this without accepting that an atheist must have a belief there is not God or whatever. Now will all or ever a significant portion of theists, in response to this more nuanced response, stop arguing that atheism is a belief? Probably not. But it does offer a chance to deescalate and acknowledge what is grounded in the other position. Perhaps some tiny victories here and there.
Sometimes, not in your case, but sometimes when I have seen atheists respond with ‘precision’ it reminds me of when a kid says he did not ‘see’ anyone take the cookies. Cause he purposely closed his eyes when doing it. It’s like hey, atheists, acknowledge what is likely driving the other team to think they are dealing with a set of beliefs, while also being precise on the sdie.
Precision, alone, can be misleading, and in the long run, I don’t think it helps the divide.
Telling the truth can be misleading, if there are omissions.
And this came off pretty condescending - with some indeterminate degree of tongue in cheek involved…
Especially that first sentence. I certainly wasn’t suggesting one lump everyone together.