I can see Sam's point. To me, this links in with some other articles I have read recently. I am an atheist (I expect most people reading this are too), but being an atheist just defines my point of view on one issue. I'm sure atheists have a wide range of views on various issues, but sometimes there seems to be a drive, both internally and externally, to paint us as a single group with a single fixed set of ideas.

I can understand that 'atheist' can be seen as a negative term as it is a specific rejection of an idea. I prefer to think that my views on life and politics are more based on a positive secular, humanist, liberal philosophy rather than trying to define myself in terms of the rejection of what other people believe.

Taking the example in the article, I can see why you can make a much stronger case when your particular logical, scientific or moral argument can stand on its own, rather than it just being put forward as a 'standard' atheist stance.