If atheism is merely the lack of belief, then we'd have to start saying that babies and toddlers are atheists. That doesn't make much sense, it seems (of course they aren't exactly theists, either!). In the same way there is a difference between anti-communists (i.e. people who have heard about communism, and explicitly reject it) and people who have never heard of such a thing.

Atheism in the ordinary sense refers to people who have been confronted with the notion of God and have rejected it. So atheism may not involve any specific, positive doctrines (e.g. naturalism), but it does necessarily involve a conscious rejection of a specific claim.

we'd have to start saying that babies and toddlers are atheists. That doesn't make much sense, it seems

Why doesn't it make sense?

Atheism in the ordinary sense refers to people who have been confronted with the notion of God and have rejected it.

Which ordinary sense is that? The one that the Christian population uses it, or the one it was originally (ordinarily) intended to be used in?

Dende, I have been an atheist since birth. I've never seen any reason to change.

I'm scared of teaching philosophy to children at too early of an age. Perhaps this is the case anyway, but they may develop a leaning or favortism toward a certain school of thought or ideology too early, they may be setting themselves up to be too rigid or fixed within that view (akin to teaching children to be religious at an early age, making it more difficult for them to grow out of that later on in life). Then again, perhaps by exposing them to different views it may do just the opposite and open their minds up. Philosophy is of a different nature, I suppose.

Quote "I'm scared of teaching philosophy to children at too early of an age."

Quite right! But what age is "too early of"?

Check out this Website.

http://www.p4c.org.nz/

And what the Stanford Encyclopaedia has to say:

http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/children/

I completely agree with Dende's point. There is a distinct difference between a person who has been exposed to a belief system and not accepted it and someone who simply has not been exposed to it. I am definitely an atheist, though I can pinpoint fairly well the point in my life when I became one. It was as a child, perhaps 1st or 2nd, when we were taught by rote to recite the pledge of alegience and the words "under God" didn't make sense to me. I asked my father, (an atheist) what that meant and when he told me about how many people believe that a magical entity created the universe and still exercises control over it. I asked him "do you believe in God" and he told me that he did not but I was free to make my own mind up about it. I saw no evidence that this "God" character existed and therefore I decided that unless further evidence becomes available, I see no reason to believe in it. For the rest of my days in grade school I always closed my mouth during the "under God" part of the pledge and I never received any flack about it. I made a decision that day that there was no evidence for God's existence and therefore unless somebody could prove to me otherwise, there was no God. That is when I made the transition from being a baby unexposed to theology to being a young adult who has the decision that he is an atheist. I did change that day. It was a turning point in my life and I really do have a radically different view of the world and existence because of my atheism than believers have. I'm 41 now and I haven't looked back. No, atheism is not a creed or an alternative theology in theory but considering how big of a part observance of religious beliefs is in a majority of people's lives, atheism might as well be a religion. My absence of faith has shaped and moved my life as much or more than any devout believer's theology has effected them. And, it has been on the same issues too: origins, life after death, belief in the supernatural etc. If somebody wants to brand atheism as a theological point of view, I would have to say, quite comfortably, "guilty as charged"!

I will agree with Dende only as far as I acknowledge that was a time when atheism did "involve a conscious rejection" of religion for me.

However, that period spanned a relatively short period, say from 10-13 years old. Religious instruction became so obviously absurd to me, that I just knew it had to be bullshit - not much different than figuring out Santa Claus was bullshit. So if, I'd hadn't had any any indoctrination at all, whatever confrontation I might have had would have been pretty inconsequential, I think. (I mean, really, Genesis is about as realistic as Bartholomew and the Oobleck.)

For the past 40 years or so, my "conscious rejection" has been of theists not theism. If religion impinged on my life with the same impact that horoscopes impact on my life, my attention to the entire subject would be reduced the occasional eye-rolling and scoffing – probably because I think that religious ritual is just plain tedious – I'm amazed that people can keep it up year after year.