[inquest]

What about being a religion for the purposes of the establishment clause? If government wanted to promote a lack of belief in a Creator, would that be constitutional?

[lugsoul]

That question is fraught with other questions. If you wanted to go by original intent, then it seems clear that the protection of atheism was probably not intended. But the promotion of lack of belief could come into conflict with the free exercise clause. I would not characterize it as "religion" for purposes of the establishment clause.