Come to think of it, Christine, isn't the very observation that
@chinu makes of his distinction between "true" and "false" theists reason enough for us atheists to both
exist as such and to insist on being visible and outspoken about it?
The only other alternative that I can see is that somehow "false" theism is supposed to both be relevant and to for no clear reason be treated as not relevant anyway.
While I realize that some people
do hold such an expectation, I do not think that it is defensable.
Indeed. I do not know if
@chinu fully grasps that, but the difference between his "true" and "false" theists is not one that absolves theism. "False" theists are just as sincere and usually much more motivated than "true" ones... and
someone must step up and challenge them to protect everyone from harm.
Apparently, if this very thread is any indication, it is too much to expect theism to contain its own excesses, and therefore it falls to non-theists to keep theists honest.
It will be a great day when that is not quite so obvious or does not make so much of a difference. But that day is not one that existed in the last millenium or so, and is not one that is about to happen right now, either.