Things for which there is no evidence...

[Sejanus]

Whilst it may indeed be true that you'd be hard pushed to find an atheist who believes in dragons, this is entirely irrelevant to being an atheist. Indeed, if no atheists believed in a dragon of any sort, this would not be because they are atheists. It would be because they have applied the same reasoning to why they disbelieve in claims of deities to that of dragons.

Ok. I know that atheism is only a response to the god claim, and that atheists
do not need to disbelieve in anything else. I'm not trying to say it is. I just want to know why that same reasoning wouldn't be applied to other things for which there is no evidence. (If the lack of evidence was the reason for disbelief) <---- I didn't make that part clear in the OP, my apologies.

When someone says something particulary stupid I try to believe they meant it ironically. It keeps me sane.

O great enlightened one! do share your immense wisdom with us mere mortals. Because, you know, calling someone stupid doesn't contribute to the discussion... even a little bit.

You've got extra baggage on your definition of 'atheism' which is why you come to your conclusions. 'A-theism' is 'an absence of theism'. It makes no statement on the reason why there might be an absence, it only describes that there is no theism.

Thanks for clarifying. I made the thread in a bit of a rush and I erroneously assumed that the reason I disbelieved in god(s) was true for most atheists.