Only you know what would be best for your situation, of course. But in general, I find that it pays to tell your family things like this in a way that's under your control, in a time and place and manner of your choosing. Otherwise, it may come out accidentally some day, in a way that wouldn't be nearly as favorable for you. Have you considered writing your family members a letter to explain your change of viewpoint? (And besides, like you said, maybe they're atheists too! Finding that out by disclosing your own non-believer status might give all of you something new in common and draw you closer together.)

BiBi x

Please consider, for example, how much sense it would make to say of blacks that they should step forward and announce their race, as if making others aware of the fact that they were black would end prejudice against them. Nor was it ever possible for women to reduce discrimination against them simply by standing up and announcing to others that they are women.

However, unlike blacks and women, atheists are an invisible group. That is to say, you cannot in general tell whether someone is an atheist just by looking at them, and this undeniably allows prejudice to persist, since the group being demonized offers no visible counterexamples to bigoted views. When a group is more obviously visible, prejudice must take root on a different basis and can be more difficult to overcome, but I firmly maintain that anti-atheist prejudice is more shallow and can be defeated by a sustained campaign of visibility - not least because the success of past social justice movements has encouraged people to be ashamed of holding bigoted views.

It is, similarly, somewhat optimistic that merely asserting and letting others know that one is an atheist will have any effect on their prejudice against atheists. Prejudice simply does not behave that way.

I strongly disagree. What would happen if a person who had previously entertained bigoted anti-atheist views suddenly learned that a friend or a loved one or a personal idol, someone whom they cared about and whose opinions they respected, was an atheist? That could only have a positive effect, weakening or destroying prejudiced views. In addition, you'll notice that I outlined a specific plan by which atheists could fight prejudice, as opposed to simply announcing one's atheism and hoping that this alone will dispel stereotypes.

What it took, on the parts of women and blacks, to actually fight discrimination was an organized campaign whereby they stood together and shouted, "We're not going to take it, anymore."

I agree, we do have to do this. Atheists will never get any societal traction until they organize politically, which is why I have called for them to do just that on many different occasions. But stepping forward to combat religious stereotypes will necessarily be the first step of any such endeavor.

Are you at all concerned that increasing our efforts to respond to negative stereotypes allows theists to define the debate?

Only if we spend all our time refuting those stereotypes and no time putting forth a positive alternative of our own. Granted, doing both is more difficult in an age of 30-second media appearances, rather than past eras where a multi-hour public debate was considered good entertainment. But I do not think it is impossible. We just have to adapt to the current media climate, especially by learning to state our views concisely and effectively, and by always giving the audience a way to find more information. The Internet is a wonderful invention in that respect.

It is, similarly, somewhat optimistic that merely asserting and letting others know that one is an atheist will have any effect on their prejudice against atheists. Prejudice simply does not behave that way.

What it took, on the parts of women and blacks, to actually fight discrimination was an organized campaign whereby they stood together and shouted, "We're not going to take it, anymore." I do not mean simply taking the issues to the courts. The only effect this will have will be to help support a campaign to appoint only bigoted judges.

The case has to be carried to the people, and it has to come with substantive demands.

Truthfully, I doubt that having convincing replies to the usual arguments will do much good to change most religious people's minds. Their beliefs are based on faith and emotion, not on reason. However, if having those replies gives the atheist courage and encourages them to stand up and be counted, then it's for all the good.