Originally Posted by RVCA

This is fundamentally incorrect. Suppose that, somewhere in the world, there is a small group of people that worship a tiny golden teapot in the sky. We could call them teapotists. Does it take someone who "rejects and disputes" the existence of this tiny golden teapot to be labeled as a "ateapotist"? No, of course not. Most people probably aren't aware that such an epistemic absurdity is considered to exist. Therefore, they lack belief in this teapot, therefore, they are ateapotists by default.

As Richard Dawkins said, "We are all atheists about most of the gods that societies have ever believed in. Some of us just go one god further."