Considering our usually common roots in systems of thought/belief based on whole cloth fictions, I think reactions to discovery that we've been intentionally misinformed are natural. Disappointment and subsequent anger are natural, unexamined responses.

The saying 'we are what we eat' finds little to no disagreement. The principle also applies to we are what we believe. As a Kinetologist, I happen also to subscribe to the belief that 'we are what we do' and that misinformation and obfuscation is more often the reason for labeling of self or others.

Based on the, for sake of discussion, agreement that we are also what we've consumed as beliefs; that they contribute to, if not entirely define, what or who we are to ourselves, it follows that rejecting validity of our notions is tantamount to rejecting *our validity. Theist or atheist most folks just don't cotton to that kinda talk.. As soon as they hear it, they commence to spoutin' scriptures or talking points. They throw perfectly valid maxims and judgments from their own frames of reference that happen also to be perfectly invalid within others' frames. And so the carousel whirls and argumentative music complements ups and downs of their respective colorful steeds.

The most annoying atheists to me are the same as the most annoying theists used to be. Some people insufficiently escape doctrinal thinking because they carry along ingrained habits of fearfully reacting to rejection of their new set of prized notions by anyone, including other atheists. They see us as united under whatever path of discovery enabled their own mustering the courage to escape theological captivity. It just ain't so! Some abandon ship on lifeboats, some with life vests, others cling to debris until they can 'swim for it' or get picked up by another vessel. Other vessels are often a worse environment than the one abandoned. The will to think and live free is at our core; well beneath our scrambled character layer.

I once attended a street fair event to visit a local organization with a booth titled 'Ask an Atheist'. The clever name instantly fetched by attention and curiosity. Upon arrival, I met some warmm bright eyed folks as welcoming as one might encounter at any tent revival. As the evening passed, I mostly observed and listened. Some people did approach with questions. When more questions followed the vastly differing answers coming from different atheist minions, tensions elevated on both sides. Soon the 'no, you're wrong about thats' started flying and fingers sprung forth; pointing in more than two horizontal directions I might add.. I never returned but learned a lot.

The foremost lesson was that I don't like other people speaking for me and giving reasons for our shared rejection of theology that don't align with my own; allleging what is or isn't science and claiming that as the superior; even unquestionable new way of investing faith. You know, faith, as the thing from which we allegedly dissociated. The longer it went on, the more embarrassing it felt not to be atheist, but to be human. It all returns to my favorite disposition about our kind. Whether or not one is a believer or claims membership in this or that theology or ideology, our damaged character structures and our little fascist managers embedded within them render the same social outcomes whenever we band together in groups.

The price is always some amount of abdication of instinctive morality, personal reasoning and sovereign agency.

i do not doubt your experience for an instant but am not typical of it i guess. i have never been christian a day in my life, not even nominally. i was raised as a secular jew, and just kind of realized there was no god when i was 15 and questioning everything, not rebelliously, just thoughtfully. it was like, oh, okay. next? and that was that been an atheist ever since.

g

My philosophy has been and always will be, that if you don't bring the crap up, I won't bring the crap up.

Most of the atheists I know would rather be left alone, and "proselytize" only in self defense.