1- Premise 1: Atheists don't believe in gods.

2- Premise 2: Vegetables don't believe in gods.

3- Conclusion: Vegetables are atheists.

I'm not trying to prove that vegetables are atheists. This only is a sarcastic attempt to state that both babies and vegetables are incapable of believing in God, thus this makes both of them inanimate atheists. First of, I should define atheism. The atheism of thinking beings is the the denial of the belief in god(s), or the lack of such belief in the presence of an ability to reason and believe. Whereas, the atheism of objects is the inability to believe in gods. I'm going to call this animate atheism and inanimate atheism. An infant has inanimate atheism, even when he is animate. His atheism is similar to the atheism of objects like fruits and vegetables. In Freudian terms, infants are in the first stage of psychosexual development(the oral stage). They are discrete from the external world around them and they lack self-identities. That is to say, infants are not really qualified to believe in anything that is supernatural, complex and external. Hence, it doesn't make sense to consider them animate atheists like us. It's like being proud of being surrounded by many atheist rocks and trees. Richard Dawkins made a good point, when he criticized those who call their children Christians or Muslims. He explained that such positions can't be attributed to humans that still can't think for themselves. Provided that animate atheism is not the default position, calling children and infants "Atheists like us" is inaccurate.