Religious "moderates" and atheists

[Mudhammam]

I don't get why you think I'm responsible for what someone else does. Are you responsible for what other atheists do and say?

Atheism is not united by any creed except the idea that insufficient evidence for any gods exists. There is nothing that associates atheists with one another that is even remotely comparable to a group that follows the same words of the same books that they all agree was divinely inspired by the same godhead called Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.

If you claimed to belong any other group, and that group was widely known for believing in the repugnant or absurd as I mentioned--take condemning non-believers, including children, to hell, for example, or drumming fear into the developing mind so that one thinks their actions are always being monitored and judged--would you really want to be part of that group? I have to think that moderates who pretend to agree with the critiques of a particular brand of faith, such as the "fundamentalists," (as when they say, "Yeah, that is a good argument but it only applies to them... that's not my brand of faith though"), do they actually mean that? Then why keep the same name association? Imagine if I said, "Yeah, I'm a Nazi, but not the Nazism as preached and practiced in Hitler's Germany. My Nazism represents peace and love. Why am I responsible for what other Nazi's say and do?" You'd rightly look at me like an idiot and ask, "Why call yourself a Nazi then? That's not how it is widely viewed or practiced." Likewise, why do moderates even bother calling themselves Christian? Just look at the history of Christianity, or the large population of nutcases who are bred in the name of that faith. Moreover, why aren't moderates at the forefront of combating these fundamentalists, instead of the atheists I mentioned? Do they just not have the moral conviction or backbone that someone like a Dawkins has?