As for the other, let me shed a bit of light on what perplexes you here (in a more general context regarding atheism, not associated with this specific case).

First, speaking out for church/state separation does not equate to "defining yourself by what you don’t believe". Some atheists define themselves by their disbelief…perhaps the ones that get the most press…but most do not. From my experience the main thing driving most atheists (and many believers as well) is church/state separation. After that, much of the discourse is exploring arguments for and against the existence of a god, afterlife, etc. There is definitely a subset that spend a lot of time attacking religion too…although I see just as much in the same approach coming from the other side too. For both believers and non-believers, this is a visible minority due to the controversial nature of their discourse. (Nice ad hominem on the Freedom from Religion Foundation, by the way.)

Second, church/state separation is a big deal, and it should be. There were great reasons for it when it was written into the Constitution, and there are great reasons for it now. If you were not a member of the religious majority you would easily see the need for it. Many of the religious majority still are able to see the need for separation, and I'm thankful for them. They understand that anything close to a theocracy would be destructive to the liberties our founding fathers and countless men and women since have fought for.

Thanks for reading,

Josh Nankivel
http://non-theist.com