Do YOU draw a meaningful difference between "strong" and "weak" atheism?

Logic and rationalism are the basis for both definitions so there is no real meaningful difference and either definition may be emotionally held exclusively. It is disheartening in the extreme that there are numerous people who need religion because of either conformity, exploitation, and justification for generosity or war. People got to take personal responsibility and not start abuse or end the cycle of abuse caused by a belief in God. Yet I wonder if the apparent notable need in some for such a distinction about atheism speaks about the controlling need to be right found in disproportional numbers in religious zealots. We do need to teach people how to deal with abuse, mis-education, hyper-dysfunctionality, etc in ways that are enlightened, safe and rational. Judgement about irrational beliefs regardless of it being deserved often fails or makes things worse. Guilt (especially judgement induced) elicits people to act in unhealthy and familiar ways to alleviate the guilt.