It is absolutely okay to provoke religious fundamentalists

[0rganism]

242. unfortunately this is more than a semantic distinction

your characterization of "an atheist as someone who assumes, in the absence of evidence, that there is no higher life form that created the universe" is accurate, but i'm not sure you recognize the distinction between "belief" and "assumption".

"belief", especially of the devout religious variety, is an active and positive affirmation of some very interesting and unusual circumstances. by denoting absence of such belief as that very same kind of belief, religious people involved in such arguments denigrate their own positive beliefs. it is NOT the same thing, and it is not simply a matter of word games.

there are many things you don't (or probably shouldn't) believe. if i tell you i have a purple unicorn in my pocket, your (likely and well-justified) disbelief of that proposition hardly rises to the level of physical, mental, or spiritual involvement one would associate with a genuine religious belief. now if i were regarded as a true prophet of your religion, my claims about purple pocket unicorns would oblige considerably more output of faith on your part, but as-is, you are quite free to dismiss them out of hand.

similarly, one's lack of religious belief in, say, Quetzalcoatl, Zeus, or Odin in no way requires the kind of positive activity that one's belief in the Judeo-Christian deity does. religious people need to give themselves more credit in general for the effort they put forth in adhering to their views, imho.