Maryland is the home state of William O'Hair, a religious Baptist who is an author of an autobiography that is critical of his more famous mother (I have not read it). He is also a political activist and I watched him testify, along with clergy, at a 2016 Maryland General Assembly committee meeting in favor of a bill that proposed that the government support religion, arguing that doing so would be good for the state and country (reducing crime) and labeling secular humanism a religion while also criticizing his murdered mother and shilling for his book. Families with some members being religious and others not religious are common. I had a religious grand uncle (he was similar to a grandfather to me). I also have an opinion about William O'Hair's mother.
I requested literature and an application form to join her organization. After browsing the literature I decided not to join. She insisted that atheism was defined as having a set of specific beliefs that went well beyond not believing in gods, or believing that there are no gods, or believing that the universe is strictly naturalistic, or believing in a set of general ethical principles. She claimed that sharing her own conclusions on various political questions were part of the definition of atheism. She said if you don't profess those same conclusions then you are not an atheist. For her, atheism was a proper noun so it was capitalized. Everyone who was an atheist was an Atheist. Her Atheism was thus a political ideology, and it was so according to the definition of Atheism as dictated by the Madalyn O'Hair.
My reaction at the time was that if I was looking for an ideology I could join a church. Her concept of Atheism was incompatible with my concept of atheism. My concept of atheism was (and still is) that it is a result of abandoning ideology, it is a conclusion derived from a refusal to be ideological, it is built upon a rejection of ideology. There can be no fixed answer to most public policy questions derived only from atheism because every issue must be evaluated independently, on its own merits, to find the best fit with available evidence, and all the relevant evidence is rarely confined to recognized that the universe is strictly naturalistic.
I became an AA member years later after the organization had mostly shed its ideological narrowness, although I got the impression that some of its membership remained O'Hair Atheists and my membership did not last long.
Nevertheless, she was smart, articulate, sharp, and she left behind some good commentary. Reading what she wrote, I cannot help but identify with her thinking more than with that of her disaffected son. So here is a sample from her writing from 1989: http://infidels.org/library/modern/madalyn_ohair/fundie.html