Non-theism is kind of like "indie music" or "non-denominational Christianity". Nominally, these things are just sort of different in one way from other standard groups. But in actual practice there are often several other major similarities.

Some people are willing to call Atheism a worldview, others consider it a single statement of non-belief. I don't much care either way. Frankly, your four commonalities are more important than the position on theism anyway.

A world (or just a community) that simply focuses on points 1 and 3 (with 2 and 4 embedded in 3 on an as needed basis), would be a great start for a better world.

It’s more that the product of antitheism is a result of the common education and environment influences we have experienced to reach our conclusions, isn’t it? This isn’t some idea that occurs within a closed mindset community of influence. It’s not the easiest choice, so there’s also a emotional characteristic as well.

I fall with all the parameters your set but "atheist" does not dictate those rubrics as Non-theists exist in a rather diverse spectrum of intellectual and rational strengths.

I am suspicious of anything organized. It is a target for corruption. Besides I like being a free radical.

I disagree with the notion of being active about something that has never been a a part of my life & is seriously unimportant to me . I am here because no-one is going to be god bothering and I am certainly uninterested in delving into whys and wherefores and fighting over naming all the words for not having a god - so it isn't all smooth sailing - but folks on here are really pleasant on the whole - its a safe site and a kindly one I choose to come here as I feel I have got to know some people and I can have a laugh.

But for the use of 'trends' I would have voted on the second choice. I have to acknowledge the trends but without allowing them to qualify as making non-believers a 'community' in broad terms. Trends are birthplaces of doctrines and people craving control of others and their points of view for personal benefit and aggrandizement are the parents. Unfortunately, most of these self-appointed leaders and definers of who is more and less legitimate are almost always male.

Rejection of beliefs in doctrines established like so many bridles for us by these would-be teamsters isn't complete evidence of independence of thought. It's only mere rejection of gods and such. What is described as our 'community' would be more pleasant and stimulating if it was closer to a complete escape.

An improvement over agnostic/atheist in filtering out people deluded by theologians would come from adding to it rejection of politogians and their fabrications about future paradises right here on the planet. I've pointed out the similarities making political ideologies functionally identical with their superstitious cousins called religions before.

Bottom line, as in function and outcome, is politically addicted lickspittles are just as captive as are the most ignorant back-woods snake handlers with the added feature of actually worshipping the snakes. They bring their saints and devils into conversations as alleged free thinkers, so proud of themselves for having rejected only one social club because it is superstitious; while proselytizing for their favorite political party or constantly failing political ideology (talk about superstition).

Trying to reason based on individual thought with a far-Right, Fundamentalist Christian or a far-Left Democratic Socialist is like trying to discuss double rainbows with the congenitally blind. If it isn't part of their darkness it not only doesn't exist; but doesn't deserve existence.

If we, as cats, could be herded, my, we'd be some herd!

I suppose there is a community of non believers. From what I have seen in the last decade or so has shown me that along with becoming a non-theist has put most in the interest of math, evolutionary biologe, astro physics and such, and for that is something that I love to see.

But it was different for me. I have always been a non-believer, I was not brought up in a religious houshold. And in my time back when, I was lucky enough that all of the sciences were taught with no religious intent.

I learned a lot back then, and it got me into some great classes in colledge. I have been greatful that I was able to learn about evolutional biology, phisics, and advanced math.

It wasn't till a few decades later that I started to hear about Atheism, flat earthers, the world is only 6 thousand years old and many things like that.

I find it abismal that the education system is so frought with discrepency that simeple things are questioned by those that have no education, yet will post such nonsense, and even more, there are so many that will believe it just because they read it on the internet.

For fuck's sake, there are some people that believe, that we didn't go to the moon, or that the earth is flat.

WTF.

I don't honestly chalk it up to stupidity, I rather posture that most are very misinformed. I'm not sure that I know a solution to that, but I do what I can to provide some real Science to those that do not know any better.

I don't pledge allegiance to science... not I am at war with god, religion or church. I don't do poll by strangers either. You are So Way Off little kid. I hope my answer will keep me off your group and collective.

I'm not interested in "collective identity".
It's definitely not anything I'd be willing to be associated with, at least not consciously.
I don't claim to be a humanist. I'm an atheist. That's it.

Broad speaking loses nuance. Nontheists have different levels of accommodation with theists. Some go further than disrespecting beliefs and start disrespecting people. It isn't wrong of me to have loved my late grandmother who was, among other better things, a zealous Catholic. When I hear contempt being expressed towards believers, rather than their ideas, I think of her.

Think most Atheists are Humanists, Pro-Diversity, and Liberal.