[ThePythonicCow]

Their [atheists] belief is in opposition to one of several views of God that they have heard from believers.

True enough - when I clarify what I mean when I state that I am an atheist, I state that I am certain that there is no God, as understood by the major theist religions of our times, and the ordinary religious people of my community.

Though arguing whether this makes atheism a religion, or not, risks getting hung up on the meanings of words. I would say that like many words, the word "religion" has multiple related meanings, some of which would encompass atheism, and some of which definitely would not.

[Ghost of Philip Marlowe]

And we can have dialectic arguments until we are both blue in the face and get nowhere except making ourselves feel undeservedly intellectual.

The practical aspect of this discussion is of greater importance. An underwhelming minority of the people in this country are doing away with the public practice of religion. Not only is this undemocratic, it's unconstitutional. A large number of those on the "atheist" side, perhaps not you, are statists who know that Statism must be its own god, that it controls the people better if religion is muted.

Thus the --potential-- importance of this ruling. It allows the 90-some% of the population who believe in a god to allow him to remain in public life, thus muzzling the statists enough to let everyone be heard.