Religion was necessary as a part of evolutionary adaptation, and to this day, it continues to function in this role. In fact, it is necessary to our survival. Your "atheism" is not any different than another "religion" just that it shares a different interpretation of your beliefs. Now, there tons of other atheists out there reinforcing your beliefs. Russians, and everyone in the Soviet Bloc, had been atheists at one point or another. Try believe in something that you know for sure no other people share your view and come back here in society and present to me a tentative argument that your religion of one is somehow crucial to your survival. I agree that religion played/plays a part in our evolution. I think I made that clear in my first post. I will not go so far as to say it is NECESSARY to our survival, but it does help form strong tribal bonds. This has nothing what-so-ever to do with my lack of belief in gods. I would like to believe that my parents and loved ones will live forever; wishing something is true does not make it so. Even if I was sure belief in gods were essential for human survival, I wouldn't believe such beings exist. Atheism is not a religion. I simply do not believe in the supernatural at all. It isn't a choice; I just don't. I could pretend and just keep quiet; that was my approach when I was growing up in the South. It is not socially acceptable to be an atheist there. It is absurd to "create" a religion out of an absence of belief in something. What is the religion of ALL people that don't believe in reincarnation; should I ask a Hindu? Dawkins is an atheist and I certainly don't embrace much of what he says (he does not believe religion has evolutionary/survival advantage and I do). The only thing I have in common with him is lack of belief in gods; what is the survival value there, the tribal bond, the evolutionary advantage, the RELIGION.