[Stone Mountain]

The reason it is important is philosophical: atheism if about what is presumed not to exist. Hence it has no symbolism and no motivating power. Since people drawn to atheism are still people, they fill the need to glorify their worldview just like the rest of us.

Not sure I get what you're saying. Since there clearly aren't a lot of monumnets to atheism, then perhaps atheists don't have as much of the need to glorify their worldview. On the other hand, if what you're saying about monuments being erected to glorify one's world view, then the car with the obnoxious bumper stickers could be viewed as that one atheist's attempt to create a rolling monument to atheism. Not one that I am crazy about, but hey, there are a lot of things out there I'm not so crazy about...

In any case, I am an atheist but feel no need to create monuments to my belief (or lack thereof) nor do I feel it's important to visit monuments that others have erected. I can't speak for all atheists, but the ones I hang out with also have this basic attitude about monuments. Symbolism and statuary is nice up to a point, but not that meaningful to me beyond the aesthetic. I guess that's why I don't really understand the point of the monument thing or your question - monumnets, to me, are decorative items that commemorate something, but are basically insignificant in the big scheme of things.

[annalex]

You rephrase my original thesis, more or less: atheists have no ability and possibly less need to glorify their worldview and the little need that they have is in the bumper sticker domain. When they get too obnoxious, force would be justified to enforce public decency.