Atheists preach "there is no god bla bla bla" then they try to get us to believe it too, well, sounds like religion, except, minus the god and the precepts of religion, just keep the hypocrisy and the logical fallacies that follow, so yes, atheist preach atheism which is a religion.
There is a common perception that there must be something more to atheism than simply disbelief in gods because of the fact that atheists are so often engaged in debates with theists. After all, what's the point of debating if not to convert someone to some other philosophy or religion?
It is, then, legitimate to ask why atheists get involved in such debates and what they hope to achieve. Does this indicate that atheism is some sort of philosophy or even a religion? The first thing to note is that many of these debates wouldn't occur if theists didn't appear in order to try to convert atheists usually to some form of Christianity. Some atheists seek out debate, but many are content to simply discuss things often not religious issues, in fact amongst themselves.
The fact that an atheist responds to prompting from a theist does not suggest that there is anything more to atheism than the absence of belief in gods. The second thing to note is that there is a legitimate interest among nonbelievers in educating people about atheism, agnosticism, and free thought. There are quite a few myths and misconceptions about these categories and people are justified in trying to dispel them.
Nevertheless, there is a category of debate which does involve something beyond atheism, and that is when debates are engaged by atheists not simply as nonbelievers, but as nonbelievers who are specifically working to promote reason and skepticism.
In this manner, the specifics of the debate may be about theism and religion, but the purpose of the debate is supposed to be about the encouragement of reason, skepticism, and critical thinking any encouragement of atheism is incidental to that.
When participating in such discussions, it is important for atheists to remember that not all theists are wildly irrational and illogical if that were so, it would be much easier to simply dismiss them.
Some are genuinely attempting to be reasonable, and some manage to do a decent job. Treating them as if they never heard of logical arguments will only serve to put them on the defensive in the end, and it is unlikely that you will accomplish anything.
This raises a very important question: if you are engaging a theist in a debate, why are you doing it? You must understand what your goals are if you have any hopes of getting anywhere. Are you just looking to win an argument or vent your negative emotions about religion and theism? If so, you've got the wrong hobby.
Are you looking to convert people to atheism? In the context of any one discussion, your chances of achieving that goal are slim to none. Not only are you unlikely to succeed, but there isn't even all that much value in it. Unless the other person begins adopting a habit of reasonableness and skeptical thinking, they won't be much better off as an unskeptical atheist than as an unskeptical theist.
I have heard atheisms talk, lecture, debate, and even denounce, but never preach. It is better to be good to each other and to build on what we all agree to be true, than to insist that we all think alike. However, does rational thinking require the adherence to beliefs at all? Does productive science, ethics, or a satisfied life require any attachment to a belief of any kind? All things we know about the world, we can express without referring to a belief. Beliefs and faiths do not establish "truths" or facts.
Atheism exists because of what we think and how we reason.
Talking for myself, I only "preach" atheism when it's needed or wished to be heard for example if someone is preaching in a way that is harmful to another person, or if it's just a discussion.
But to the question: People preach because they want give their knowledge to others, just as a religious person does.
It's just as simple as that.
Atheists, at least the one's I've come in contact to or heard about, preach atheism. They never seem to be happy letting people believe what they want to believe. If I want to believe in Jesus Christ and Creation over Evolution it is my right to do so. Why can't atheists just be happy with that? But they're always trying to prove why my faith is wrong.
Its not an atheist thing its a person thing. Bigotry is in humans not religion. We are so stubborn to think we are right when we sound so ridiculous. I'm an atheist and I don't preach it unless someone asks me or we're debating it. Ill make a comment every now and then but that's the most. If we are debating something in class and Adam and Eve comes up for example. I'll make a comment on how that count have happened or something. But of course no one can prove it its just my opinion.
A person who believes in the afterlife will preach to others in hope of helping them get into heaven by accepting their religion and god/s. An atheist doesn't believe in the afterlife, there is no need for them to compile a list of righteous deeds to show the lord. To them life has no meaning, we are born, we live, we die, and we cease to exist. I can understand that some atheists will preach to defend their beliefs when provoked by a religious preacher, but i don't understand the atheists who write books denouncing god, and the atheists on tv denouncing god, telling everyone to leave religion. To me that makes no sense. Whether people become atheists or not, it won't help them at all. Why create a cause when ultimately like us, we will stop being existent.
Nobody preaches atheism. Atheism is just the answer to a question regarding the belief in a deity. There is no Atheist Dogma or Ideology. Every atheist can be vastly different from the next. There are atheists that are homophobic, atheists that are communists, and even atheists that believe in the tooth fairy.
To say that atheism is "preached" by those who are atheist, is ridiculous. Atheists tend to be rational thinkers that derive their beliefs and morals based upon their own worldview given the evidence to support their perspective. Just because atheists agree that they don't believe in God does not mean that this is some sort of principle that Atheists as a group are trying to push on others.
If atheism is a religion, then abstinence is a sex position.
This idea that atheists "preach" atheism is purely ignorant. An atheist may explain why they are an atheist, or they may explain science-y things, but there is absolutely NO dogma to atheism that they can sermonize on. Atheism is the LACK OF BELIEF in a god or gods. It has no positive claims. You can't preach about something that has no tenets.
Atheists usually argue for some combination of the rationalist-empiricist method of truth seeking (such as the one that mainstream science currently uses). That method does not actively seek to dismiss the existence of God, but over time it has ground away at so many of religion's base assumptions that believing in God and supporting that method of epistemology is no longer consistent. With regards to conversion, you have us there. We want beliefs to be based on the (verifiable and testable) evidence available. Shame on us.
Mist atheists view religion as hateful and useless, religion causes false hope, war, genocide, and terrorism, and scientific illiteracy. Athiest don't "preach" because they want people to join the cult, they "preach" becaise they want to eliminate religion for everyone's safety and advancement. Religion tries to denounce verifiable science and causes war and hate, while it can be argueed that teligion does some good for the world it should be noted that being charitable and having morality should come from yourself not from a book saying you have to do something, if they don't your not a well adjusted human being.