Atheists do not have an excuse for preaching atheism

I accept my opponent' definitions (though let me remind readers that to exhort is not exhortation, ie a criminal offense, but exhortation) and thank him for the debate. Here's to a good one. First, some foundations. In my opponent's original quote, he says that theists think they are doing good, therefor they have an excuse. Therefor, to show that atheists think they are doing good by preaching atheism, will show they have an excuse by my opponent's own standard. Other circumstances which would excuse the actions of atheists who attempt to spread their lack of belief would be if they were not of sound mind, or were attempting to protect themselves from a perceived threat. I would also like to stress that how fair, effective, nice, reasonable, etc, preaching is does not matter. All that matters is whether it is excusable. I will be arguing that atheists both think they are doing good by encouraging disbelief, and are attempting to protect themselves. In both cases it only matters what they think. For the purposes of this debate, I will focus on America primarily for reasons of simplifying the debate, however my opponent is free to move to focus globally. I am sure my opponent is aware that atheists generally view religion and supernatural belief as harmful. We can find this opinion in atheist publications and organizations. You can see examples here: http://goo.gl... http://goo.gl... http://goo.gl... http://goo.gl... Google searching for the top atheist blogs, you find the authors expressing these opinions: "In the history of the world, nothing has been the catalyst of more grief, hatred, war, and crime than religion. Religion allows a person to hate, kill, torture, or steal, while allowing him to recuse himself of all blame. Religion causes people to break the laws of ethics and morality in the name of a god. Religion dulls the mind and weakens the senses. It makes "God did it" seem like a reasonable answer to anything at all, squelching questions of why, and how, and when, and replacing these questions with repeated mantras and prayers to nobody." "A believer, Price says, remains forever on the lowest rungs of character development. He is moral out of fear of punishment from his deity. His fear of hell keeps him from being evil, and he is motivated to do good in order to get heavenly rewards. There is no goodness for goodness sake." I asked people on Twitter why they encourage disbelief. Their responses can be seen in recent replies to myself asking why they oppose belief and whether they agree with the link in the below paragraph: http://goo.gl... Responses are still coming in (and older ones from my original posting of this debate aren't currently being shown, but the consensus was that belief is harmful). Finally, this post (and the comments in agreement) explains atheist feelings of needing to be defensive and destroy belief perfectly: http://goo.gl... And of course, atheists feel threatened. We make up 1.6% of the population of the US, where the religious make up 75%. It is safe to call atheists a minority, yet I am sure my opponent will acknowledge that atheists do not have the political clout of other minorities. Atheists believe themselves because of this and because of the actions of the religious people they are surrounded by, that they are vulnerable and attacked, and so many atheists are defensive or militant because of this. For example, religious tolerance is a common factor in decisions but rarely is lack of belief considered. And with statements like "atheists aren't real people" and "atheists shouldn't be considered citizens" coming from well-respected public figures, the feeling hasn't sprung out of thin air. Whether it's true or warranted isn't the issue here. Atheists clearly feel both threatened and like they are doing people good. Right or wrong, they clearly have an excuse: they are defending themselves, others, and attempting to improve life.