Must just be another form of social entertainment.Should really not be called a church though.

Why even call it a temple? Or even a religion for that matter.. If their what they claim, why would they have to correspond to the established church? Sounds  like spite to me. Should be different as day from night (not in terms of good and bad though) the atheists' practice should in no way resemble what is defined as traditional religion.

It's absolutely senseless (in terms of actual logic) as well as totally absurd !  Number one : If athiests believe that there is "no God", then what (pray tell) would they be "worshipping" (since a church does represent a sacred house or place of worship) ? Number Two : The only logical alternative explanation for so-called "atheists" wantiing a "church" (of their "own') is that they, in effect would be worshipping each other - even in their continued assertions that they do not believe in God - in which case, they would be and are treating each other as individual Gods within themselves, of which is and/or would be 100% contradictory to their statements that they, indiviually as well as in Atheists groups as an entire entity, do not acknowledge God Himself or believe in "any Gods" whatsoever !!

I suspect it's more of a community center in the form of a sacastic spoof

Not surprising,  it's based on believing there is no god.   That concept is their right.   I don't agree but it harms me not at all

Atheism has been a religion from the day the first man decided to religiously believe that there is no God. The fact that it is a term of endearment for some rather than merely a description for those that don't believe in God, only proves it's authenticity as its own religion.

Any kind of religious practice devoted to one's faith is, by definition, a religion. And to insist that there is not God, to place on faith that no God exists despite the monumenteious number of things that humans cannot explain, and will never be able to explain, and finally despite any evidence to the contrary, is a religious practice of "non-belief" as Dawkins so accurately puts it when he coined a phrase talking about himself as a "religious non-believer."

Just because they erect walls and congregate inside of a building rather than meeting at a local coffee shop, school, or bookstore means nothing. A church body has never been truly defined as building anyway, but as a group of like-minded people who meet in order to discuss and honor that in which they religiously place their faith.

Not my problem if they want to believe whatever they want. They can believe in the giant flying spaghetti monster for all I car. My problem comes when they decide they have the right to brutally and rudely and violently force their beliefs on the rest of the world, and their bitching about any government or business or whatever having the balls to say they believe in God. They can believe whatever they want, fair enough. Just keep it to themselves and stop getting pissed off and violent because most of the world does not, and never will, agree with you.

An invisible church, that's cute ,will   they have an invisible Pope as well ?