The acceptance of Astronism by various atheists began from the initial years of Astronism's emergence from the writings and efforts of Cometan, although the relationship between Astronism and organised and politicised forms of atheism, particularly those espoused in militant atheism and in the New Atheism movement, has witnessed considerable strain. This strain has not least been strengthened by Cometan's criticism of the more extreme forms of atheism, particularly those which also involve anti-religious and as a subsequence, anti-diversity slants. 

Cometanic writings on atheism

"The problem with atheism is that it is too often falsely treated as a belief identity by those who describe themselves as atheists. Pretty much all atheists I've ever come across are quicker to proclaim that they are atheist than most religious people are to claim that they are religious. Atheism is therefore not sufficient as a term of identity because it does not encapsulate that person's entire belief system yet it continues to be incorrectly used in comparison to terms like Christian and Muslim which represent a vast array of complex belief structures. This highlights an issue with irreligiosity as whole; the deficiency in accurate and terms of equal weighting demonstrates an internal problem within irreligious communities to accurately present themselves. The central issue is that the term atheism is presented to be in comparison to terms like Christianity and Astronism while in fact, the opposite is true, because atheism is not a belief system, rather it is a single disbelief without any other contribution to philosophical discussions about existence, reality, or otherwise (I'll come to atheism's hijack of science in a moment). This deep-seated ambiguity in the word atheism suggests that a new set of terms to refer to those of an atheistic leaning need to be created so that these individuals may accurate portray their views on other, arguably more pertinent topics than the existence of God. For example, just as I know that Catholics would disagree with the practice of abortion, I would not immediately know whether a person describing themselves as atheist would stand in support of abortion or not. This may seem like a trivial issue, but this is a deep-seated problem of identity that atheists face, thus leading to issues such as the conflation of inaccurate beliefs and actions with atheism, namely those of an anti-religious nature."

"Atheists are constantly "self-conflating" as they state their main belief identity to be atheist, yet this term leaves them totally devoid of the ability to truly express the full diversity of their beliefs regarding topics that are much more important than whether they think God exists or not. The fact that atheists focus their entire belief identity around the non-existence of God demonstrates their own outdatedness as they consider the question of whether there is a God or not to be so important to their ideological stance that they miss the fact that God's existence really doesn't matter in the material world that they consider to be the only reality, hence I side with non-theism. It is for this reason that non-theism reigns supreme over atheism. Because atheists begin on a negative, they have nowhere else to go but to devolve into themselves, attempting to pull theists and non-theists down with them into a never-ending rabbit hole of denial instead of actually attempting to think beyond the immediate surroundings of themselves to sufficiently and proactively contribute to discussions. And as for atheism clutching onto science as its classmate in this denialism drivel, well, that is one of the greatest injustices there are. What did science ever do wrong that it was forced to be coupled up with a group of people whose stance on God has nothing to do with actual scientific discovery. Atheists say that science has nothing to do with God so therefore neither does atheism them."

"Many of these problems of identity stem from the fact that atheism has no true direction or form of leadership. This gives opportunity for extremists like Richard Dawkins, who is essentially the leader of New Atheism at this point, to use their loud voice as some kind of quasi-representative of atheists when in actual fact, most atheists do not wish to see the end of religion, but instead the continued challenge and criticism of all different types of religions. All I'm saying is that atheists need to rethink their obsession over no God and instead redirect their energy and passion for debate towards issues of real importance, such as how we can find out if exists life on other planets, how humanity can survive on planet Earth, what the purpose of humanity is, what is beyond the expanding cosmos etc. Essentially, all atheists, please focus your attention on the real world rather doggedly attacking theists on their beliefs in the existence of a supreme being that you say you supposedly don't even care about."