Why I am not bothered By Atheism

Over on Google +, I have come across a good handful of conversations discussing the ideology of Atheism. It started with a video post from +Deepak Chopra defending against +Richard Dawkins Foundation for Reason and Science , which exploded into a large debate on the issue of Atheism Vs Religion.

And as I sift through all of the different points of view, I can't help but notice how much I don't feel a part of the debate.  From one perspective, I am atheist (insofar as I don't believe in the Christian idea of God or Deity), and on the other I can't, on any level (logically, rationally, intuitively) accept that there is not an Absolute Source of all life, love, and intelligence (which I sometimes refer to as God), which permeates all creation, and in which I live, move, and have my being.

I simply cannot commit to a 'belief' in God, simply because God (as I experience it) does not require belief. And this is so, because God simple IS.

However...

Burden of Proof. 

Given that God is the Source of all Life, Love, and Intelligence, the proof is in the presence of all 3 in our Universe. Some might argue that just because you have intelligence, doesn't mean that there HAS to be an Absolute source of that intelligence.

I beg to differ...

Take your computer for instance. Without you (Source), the intelligence it operates with (merely an extension of your own), would have no context for its existence (and then would not exist). 

I agree that for most religions, and how they describe God, the burden of proof is necessary, and something they should closely inspect. The truth of the matter is that most people who claim membership to a religion, weren't given much of a choice. Religion is deeply tied with culture, geographic location, family beliefs, etc.. 

I consider myself fortunate enough to have not been raised in a home where religion was a big issue, which afforded me the opportunity to pave my own path, and think (and experience) for myself. And yes, I did go through them all, finding Truth sprinkled in each. 

One of Dawkin's arguments seems to be that combining what occurs within the Universe, does not carry over to the Nature of the Universe itself. So that the Universe as a whole and what goes on 'within' it, are two different things.

I suppose the argument changes to Atheism Vs Non-Duality....