Atheism isn't a religion and as an atheist I find that an offensive statement.

Nature existed before we did and will exist after us, it can't be true that it exists for us.

> it can't be true that it exists for us

You're saying it as if you assume some external entity judging whether something exists for somebody or not.

As an atheist you would acknowledge that the entire concept of "existing for something/somebody" is entirely a construct of human mind, which human mentally applies to the observable universe around them. So for an atheistic human mind, everything exists for human, as there's nobody else to exist for.

We're putting too much pressure on the word "for", here. There are no great truths to be found at this level of linguistic imprecision .

Doesn't matter what those religions claim, nature existed long before humans and exists beyond humans and will exist long after us. On earth, there are living creatures with their own motivations that inhabit all the remote wildernesses and deep seas. And life may exist on other planets.

> nature existed long before humans and exists beyond humans and will exist long after us

If this is true (and I believe it is), then it does not really matter much what humanity does in the big picture. Might as well drain some swamps and seas to reclaim some land.

> On earth, there are living creatures with their own motivations that inhabit all the remote wildernesses and deep seas

You can both acknowledge that, and believe that human must do what's good for humans and animals that are good for humans.