Well I asked Jeeves, and he said this......
Myth:
Atheism is just another religion.
Response:
For some strange reason, many people keep getting the idea that atheism is itself some sort of religion. It's an assertion which I keep hearing in newsgroups, in private email, and in this site's chat room. Maybe it is because these people are so caught up in their own religious beliefs that they cannot imagine any person living without religion of some sort. Maybe it is due to some persistent misunderstanding of what atheism is. And maybe they just don't care that what they are saying really doesn't make any sense.
Whatever the actual reasons, this claim keeps appearing and this article is my attempt to answer such ideas by dissecting an actual letter which I have received, one which manages to perpetrate a number of mistakes:
Dear Sir,
I am afraid I will have to kindly decline your offer to rewrite my post. I stand by my original contention; atheism is a religion. Whether it fits technically with the semantics or not is not a concern of mine; the practical definition of religion is what matters to me, not the letter of the law. And the practical definition, distasteful though it may be to those who disdain religion in all its forms, is that the very thing most atheists hate is what they have become: a religion, with clearly defined rules, eschatology and a philosophy by which to live. Religion is a means of understanding our existence. Atheism fits that bill. Religion is a philosophy of life. So is atheism. Religions has its leaders, the preachers of its tenets. So does atheism (Nietzsche, Feuerbach, Lenin, Marx). Religion has its faithful believers, who guard the orthodoxy of the faith. So does atheism. And religion is a matter of faith, not certainty. Your own faithful say that, as that is what I was referring to in my posting. Welcome to the religious world!
Please forgive my contentious tone. However, I would very much like to bring some (albeit not all as that is not possible) to the realization that all religions set themselves apart from the crowd; they are the pure, the faithful, all others are just "religion." Here again, atheism fits the bill.
That's the whole letter in one shot, in order to give readers a sense of original context. Let us now examine it piece by piece so that we can get a better sense of just what lies behind it all...
Whether it fits technically with the semantics or not is not a concern of mine;
In other words, he doesn't care if he misuses language to fit his purposes? This is a very sad attitude to adopt, but at least he is honest enough to admit it - others making the same claims are less forthright. The fact is, his (convenient) definition lacks one of the central aspects of what a religion most often is (a belief in gods or the supernatural) - and that's an abuse of language. In fact, whether or not atheism fits technically with the semantics of "religion" should be a concern of his, if he has any interest in an honest dialogue.
Let's examine what he considers to be the defining characteristics of "religion."
...a religion, with clearly defined rules, eschatology and a philosophy by which to live. Religion is a means of understanding our existence.
Does atheism have anything approaching "clearly defined rules?" Not in the least. There is only one "rule," and that is the rule of the definition of "atheism" - not having any belief in any gods. Other than that, atheists are free to do whatever they want and still be called atheists. An atheist can do and believe absolutely anything beyond gods and still fit the definition. Quite the opposite of how "rules" are treated in a religion. This is one area where a misunderstanding of what atheism is probably comes into play.
Does atheism have an "eschatology? Eschatology is a "belief about the end of the world or the last things." Now, I'm sure that many atheists have some sort of beliefs about how the world might end, but those beliefs sure aren't clearly defined or uniform among all of us. In fact, any beliefs about the end of the world are accidental - that is to say, they are not a necessary part of atheism. There is absolutely, positively nothing inherent in the disbelief in gods that leads one to any opinions about the end of the world. Quite the opposite of how 'eschatology' is treated in a religion.
The rest is here, and it all makes perfect sense to me, this person said it much better then I have patience for, but read and decide for yourself......
http://atheism.about.com/library/FAQs/ath/blathm_rel_religion.htm