Hey Anti-Theists! Prove Your Claim

[Dystopia]

It literally means 'in opposition to theism'. If you claim that 'theism is wrong' that's in opposition to a theistic proposition therefore inherently anti-theistic. Also, theists do tend to be anti-theistic regarding gods in which they don't believe.

No, if I claim theism is wrong that only means I think theism is wrong. I could be a gnostic atheist and think the belief in gods had positive effects, I could abstain from opposing it and even incentive people to believe because I thought it brought them benefits. Anti-theism means being against theism. Theism is the belief god or gods exist (or the positive claim), therefore anti-theism means being against theism, even if god does exist. Saying solely 'god doesn't exist' doesn't make me an anti-theist, it just makes me a gnostic atheist. And yes some theists are anti-theists, but not all, EG Liberal theists and some liberal Christians or Muslims

It does if that denial is in opposition to a theistic proposition.

Of course I agree, I'm saying if you solely claim god doesn't exist without opposing positively to people believing in it.

Exactly but if your denial takes an opposing form, it's anti-theistic.

In my case, yes, but there could be gnostic atheists out there that don't oppose theism, they just think it's wrong. I can think something is wrong and not oppose it, don't take it harsh but you saying I can't do it is an offence to my intellectual faculties.

That would be true under the broad definition I'm using. Given the more tailored definition that you're using, it wouldn't. You need to keep in mind the different uses of the prefix 'anti' and how that changes with context.

Yes but I'm sticking with the 'classical' definition of anti-theism, making it bigger isn't of many use.

Yes. It's also an anti-theistic proposition. The claim of non-existence is in direct opposition to the theistic claim of existence; anti-theistic. To use the latin form, it is also the contradiction of the propositon; contra-deistic. Modern use is layered over the original use: deism now o'days means something different to theism but etymologically, they mean exactly the same thing. I like the flexibility of language.

It's not anti, I'm not positively against the theistic proposition, I'm merely saying it's wrong. Let's put it simple:
If I say 'god doesn't exist, and believing in god is bullshit, people should stop doing it' OR 'god doesn't exist, and the god concept is idiotic' I'm probably an anti-theist

If I merely say 'god doesn't exist' I'm just saying I don't think god exists, I'm not obligated to be opposed to the concept of god or people believing in it. After all, I'm not 100% sure and people have the right to disagree with me. I don't think considering something wrong means being 'anti-that' immediately. For instance, I think adultery is wrong, but I'm not anti-adultery.

Me too. I put it in these terms: my anti-theism is manifest when presented with some theistic propositions but not with others.

It's valid if you chose to interpret the etymology of the expression this way, but keep in mind some people might not know exactly what you mean, since anti-theism is attributed to a direct opposition either to the god concept/religion or to people believing in god.