Secularists today

Peace and blessings,
Your approach to secular people today regarding the law "before the blind" and the like is that they are not actually included in the offense at all because once heresy was a matter of will, but as soon as it becomes a matter of intellect and thought that one simply does not believe, then they do not belong to the mitzvah. Therefore, they are not actually being held responsible for anything.
Apparently, Rabbi Kook solves the difficulty in a much easier way. Rabbi Kook claims that everything the Sages said about apocrypha and the like is when they claim a certain claim in reverse. But when there are sufficient grounds and the religious claim is not sufficiently accepted only from a doubter's perspective, it is not called apocrypha. And since, as is well known, it is always actually a claim of doubt (I think Russell or another well-known atheist said that he is defined as an agnostic but de facto atheist), the moment someone claims a certain claim in reverse, he is evil and it goes back to a matter of will (because it is not possible to reach such a rational conclusion). What do you think of this solution?
These are the relevant words of Rabbi Kook:
"And as for the law. Know that, despite the fact that it is a complete and evil prohibition, even for someone who is content and reflects on the words of complete faith, in any case we do not find that Chazal ruled on the law of Epicurus, but only on the infidel, that is, the one who decides the opposite. And the decision to the contrary cannot be found at all in Israel among any person who is not completely wicked and deliberately lies. For the greater conviction cannot but cast doubt on the weak-minded, and since it is true that someone who dares to say that he is a clear infidel is an absolute wicked person, who rightly deserved to be judged by all the explicit laws, and here there is no argument of his heart being violated at all." (Igrot HaRaia 1, Letter 20)