[Serious] Atheist Dogma

[Belacqua]

Why should anyone care if you consider a babies non-belief trivial? 

I'm saying that they are atheist in a trivial sense. They lack belief in God, but they lack belief in everything else, too.

So a baby doesn't exit the womb contemplating the existence of a god, why is this a problem[?]

It's not a problem. It's a fact of life. 

 and why does this require a change to the definition of atheism?

It doesn't. But some people are claiming that their atheism, as thinking adults, is the same as that of a baby who has never heard of or believed anything in its life. I don't accept this.

Some people claim that the atheism of a thinking adult is lack, only lack, and nothing but lack. I say it is a lack, but one that is sustained by beliefs (=what we hold to be true) about the world and what constitutes good evidence.

---

While most societies have included people who don't believe in god[s], the history of atheism has a history that is full of contingencies -- like everything else about people.

How people in a majority-religion culture can think thoughts that lead to rejecting that religion is an interesting history. The book reviewed here adds to that history:

https://genealogiesofmodernity.org/blog/...-modernity