Well I was raised a witness so I never really bought into the whole thing anyway. Obviously the suggestion made in the first post is facetious but I think it's interesting that underlying the suggestion is an assumption that atheism is a lesser conviction than theism. There is an an assumption of the superiority of theistic convictions, in much the same vein as 'oh atheists have no morals', and that the atheist will revert to a stronger more basic theistic conviction if their life was at risk.
I would have thought that the posts on this forum alone should convince anyone that atheistic convictions are as strong as any theistic convictions. It's funny though because thinking about this made me wonder about my own thought that I can't understand how anyone who believes in a caring and loving god can watch the results of natural disasters such as earthquakes, tsunamis, drought, plague or starvation and not think 'that god, he's a w*nker' Perhaps I'm making an assumption of the superiority of my own convictions there too.
But of course there is a difference in the choices we make to arrive at those two points and perhaps that is where the difference in the two viewpoints lie.