I can feel your anger

[CliveStaples]

However, the fatal flaws here are glaring-
1. It over complicates the issues, because
2. No belief system puts atheism as its cornerstone, that is, no belief system looks to a lack of belief to inform the actions of an individual. In fact, I don't even think it's possible to look to a position of nonbelief as the primary informant of your actions.
I guess it could be, maybe... But I sure as Jehova's nonexistence don't see it happening.

I don't find this very convincing. People don't look to theism for a cornerstone either. Nobody's actions are informed by the mere proposition, "God exists".

My point is that people are informed by sets of beliefs, and that when those sets are theistic, we say that theism informed their actions; why isn't that when those sets are atheistic, we say that atheism informed their actions?


Here's the big question:

What's wrong with saying that if a person's set of motivating beliefs lacks the belief, "At least one god exists", then their motivating set is atheistic?