2. On the other hand, this "Atheism requires faith" argument seems silly too. I do not think any of us apply that argument to any other imaginary situation. For example, I do not go around saying, "wow you think there are no unicorns. You must have faith to do that!" It's not necessary, and it sounds ridiculous.

Atheism attained popularity because of its more radical claims than agnosticism.

Uhhhh...atheism is not "popular" at all.

Sent from my DROID RAZR using Tapatalk

Atheism by definition makes no claims other than a disbelief in any deities. There might be groups that identify themselves as atheists and make certain claims, but that doesn't make them atheist viewpoints.

In 2007, there are an estimated 157,529,444 people worldwide who are atheists. This is according to data compiled from the 2010 World Factbook of the United States Central Intelligence Agency. This number represents about 2.32% of the world population at that time. Translated to current population statistics there would be about 170,088,267 atheists in the world today.

Coming from every country in the world and carrying an identical creed to that of every other race's atheists

Atheism by definition makes no claims other than a disbelief in any deities. There might be groups that identify themselves as atheists and make certain claims, but that doesn't make them atheist viewpoints.

Uhhhh...atheism is not "popular" at all.

Take that however you wish. 2% of the population is tiny. Fringe. Nothing. An argument based on the "popularity" of atheism seems weak.

Which is a claim, unless, as I spoke of, you're suggesting the "live in a vacuum" philosophy which doesn't hold any water.

Even if that is true, however, my suggestion is along the lines that it is considered more radical per the reasoning of requirement of faith as opposed to agnosticism which requires none. Whether or not it makes claims is irrelevant when put alongside agnosticism in terms of how far in one direction it leans, or at least is perceived in leaning. I'd add that perception is important insofar as the fact that people flock to atheism as a result.

In other words, people who want to live on soap boxes and be attention whores would more easily flock to atheism.

You can't really look at the 2% figure by itself. Take in the fact that the majority of academia, scientists, and other focused fields that require high amounts of education typically consist of larger populations of atheists. Now consider: Who controls the vocabulary and context in which we see arguments framed? Are poorer religious folks going to participate in these arguments to their fullest extension? In that context, 2% looks more like 75% in terms of its impact on society.

I can't give my side, because I teach these kids, and their parents would go apeshit if they knew there was a crazy atheist with any influence over their children in their school.

You might be surprised. I lived for 10 years as a vocal atheist. Never had any problems, and I worked for an extremely conservative company at the time. Still found ways to get promoted.