Opinion of the phrase, "rejecting god". Is it correct?

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Naturally, I despise it.  It's often something that is said to atheists, and it spits in the face of what they believe.  "Rejecting" god would suggest that we know full well that there is a god, but we are just big meanies and nasties and we don't accept the wonderful gift. 

Of course, in reality, I don't think there is anything there for me to reject. 

I had a friend of the family ask me why I keep rejecting god, and I told her I couldn't become Christian (which is what I'm guessing she thought I would naturally be if i were religious) even if I tried because I believe what I believe, and that if I did become religious it would be nothing more than a farce.  How she could not understand this most simple of concepts bewildered me. 

Thoughts?

[Robert California]

Very accurate.

[Tokugawa Sexgod Ieyasu]

Not a constructive or useful way to refer to atheists, and could probably be put to more trenchant use within the milieu of purportedly religious people behaving badly.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Very accurate.

Then please tell me how I personally can reject something I don't believe is there.  Am I rejecting the fairies that grow the grass in my yard? 

[afleitch]

Very accurate.

Then please tell me how I personally can reject something I don't believe is there.  Am I rejecting the fairies that grow the grass in my yard? 

Probably a more...sympathetic charge would be defining Cathcon solely by the fact he rejects Zeus or Shiva. Which of course would be unfair.

[TJ in Oregon]

Very accurate.

Then please tell me how I personally can reject something I don't believe is there.  Am I rejecting the fairies that grow the grass in my yard? 

Probably a more...sympathetic charge would be defining Cathcon solely by the fact he rejects Zeus or Shiva. Which of course would be unfair.

It depends whether the atheist was always an atheist or not. If Cathcon was raised believing in Zeus or Shiva and later came to the conclusion that Zeus and Shiva do not exist, then he'd be rejecting them.

[DC Al Fine]

Very accurate.

Then please tell me how I personally can reject something I don't believe is there.  Am I rejecting the fairies that grow the grass in my yard? 

The phrase is sometimes used in this context. If I argued that there is a racial element to intelligence and you thought that was incorrect, I could say you were rejecting the hypothesis. That is how the term would apply to you. You may not be giving God the middle finger, but I think it is fair to say you have been presented with the idea of God and rejected it.

[afleitch]

Very accurate.

Then please tell me how I personally can reject something I don't believe is there.  Am I rejecting the fairies that grow the grass in my yard? 

The phrase is sometimes used in this context. If I argued that there is a racial element to intelligence and you thought that was incorrect, I could say you were rejecting the hypothesis. That is how the term would apply to you. You may not be giving God the middle finger, but I think it is fair to say you have been presented with the idea of God and rejected it.

Then likewise, you have rejected the notion of there not being a god when presented with the idea. Yet you are not defined by that. As a common courtesy, that should be extended.

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

Very accurate.

Then please tell me how I personally can reject something I don't believe is there.  Am I rejecting the fairies that grow the grass in my yard? 

The phrase is sometimes used in this context. If I argued that there is a racial element to intelligence and you thought that was incorrect, I could say you were rejecting the hypothesis. That is how the term would apply to you. You may not be giving God the middle finger, but I think it is fair to say you have been presented with the idea of God and rejected it.

This is fair enough in some situations, but often the phrase is used to describe atheists as not being "open" to the idea... that their atheism is a result of a type of close-mindedness, an assumption that the person hadn't engaged in any critical thought about the subject, and "opening their heart" will inevitably lead to some spiritual revelation.   Also, the way the phrase has been presented to me leads me to believe that the person using it doesn't not believe that I could lead a moral or happy life without religious belief, which I find insulting.