Even atheist poster boy Richard Dawkins, on a scale of 1 (believes in god) to 7 (atheist) describes himself as a 6.9. [source]On Dawkins' scale, I am at 7.
Leaving that 0.1 at the end gives the religious too much benefit of doubt. Why it is when on the issue of god, which has no proof of its existence, that I need to leave the last 0.1 of doubt? When evidence of god comes, I can switch from 7 to 1 upon validating the evidence. That's the benefit of a person living the life based on evidence. :-)