The same can be said for the Easter Bunny, Frankenstein's Monster and Santa.

I think you are correct. In my opinion there is more similarity in viewpoint between the religious and atheists than either have with agnostics.

The difference to me is the I admit that 'There is no god' is an opinion. Find me a believer who will say the same.

The Christians in my family had a fit when I taught my niece that Christianity and the whole Jesus thing was just one of many religious choices.

This question is a classic example of the typical shifting the burden of proof straw man argument.

Few atheists assert there is not god.

My observation is, there is not testable/falsifiable evidence to suggest a god exists. Without evidence of a god, the default argument is to not accept an argument (there is a god) that has yet to be demonstrated.

atheist (not a theist) does not assert there is not god. We simply lack a belief in a god that has yet to be demonstrated.

When asked if there is a god, I always respond with there is not enough evidence to support a god exists so I, a person that values truth based on facts, (things that can be demonstrated with evidence) over superstition/ (faith) belief without evidence, do not believe a god exists. This position does not assert there is no god.

You should never phrase it way...we can’t say that there is no god, only that there is no evidence of a god. Because there is no evidence, there is no logical reason to believe he exists. It is standing logic on its head to say that there is an equivalence between their belief in god and our disbelief that there is, due to lack of evidence. We can’t prove that there is no god, but we are not the ones asserting anything, they are. They cannot prove there is a god because you cannot prove a negative. The burden of proof is not on us but them.

There is no logical argument that can be made for the existence of a God, but plenty of arguments can be made against there being a God.