I didnt say there wasnt. But it really is ridiculous. If you are Agnostic you know there is not reason to believe there is a god. The Atheist just goes a step further and concludes that the absense of proof actually can conclude a probable absense of a God. Because as an agnostic knows, there is no reason to believe he exists.

Disproving something that doesn't exist is impossible. So sure, if you want to pretend there is a middle ground go ahead. But its just a position where you refuse to draw a conclusion.

The same postition can be said about a teapot orbiting Mars. Is there a teapot orbiting mars? We don't know until we have proof. But you know there isnt one.

So, yes my conclusion, wich isnt a simplication, is an observation on the obvious conclusion that the agnostic refuses to take a stand on to try and keep a semblance of some "neutrality". But quite honestly, i find it a bit disonest.

That wasn't the point of the post. It was that I don't agree with you basically putting agnositics and atheists in the same category

The first minority president was black. The next one will obviously be a woman. After that, I think it goes hispanic/gay/atheist/muslim... in that order. 

An agnostic is basically someone who proclaims that they DON'T know the answers that become known once one dies etc. They're entirely different things.

What you describe as an agnost isn't agnostic at all. If you're agnostic, you're uncommited to a belief system and don't necassarily believe in god, but it also implies you don't don't belive in god/gods/forces of nature.

Agnosticism is a middle way, it's not a step towards atheïsm. I'm agnostic, I used to be Catholic but I wrote myself out of the register. I don't believe in the christian dogma's, but I just as well refuse to take an absolute cold stance on spirituality. it's not dishonest, it's what differentiates us between atheïsts and practitioning believers.

You do what you want with your religious stance, but don't tow agnosts with atheïsts, because THAT is dishonest.

I do not think most people are deeply religious or fiery atheists.

They are in the middle.

I dislike people who are atheists that say you believe in 'God' so you think the earth is a few thousand year old...

Life is not that simple...

These are religious terms. They make no sense to begin with. Its just a way to give religious people a defense mechnism. Atheism is the belief there is no God. But alas, that isnt a belief. Theres no belief system. The default position is to not believe in things that aren't proven. These are terms pitched by religious people to say "Oh, that is YOUR belief". It's not. Its the lack of.

If it makes you feel better, its the same thing to just say Atheism isnt a thing. We are all Atheists or Agnostics. Pick Agnostic if it makes you feel better, but at the end of the day its the same thing. It's just feigning neutrality.

You really are the light of the party. No it's not the same thing. They're distinctly different. I'm not agnostic because I think I'll be agnostic all my life. I'm agnostic because atm, I'm not adhering to any religion or belief system and because I'm certainly not an atheïst.

This is something I've always found annoying. It seems as if anyone who practices a religion is instantly a fundamentalist. It makes me cringe honestly. I've been in dozens of roundtables and studies on religion in university, and have even met seminarians who take more pragmatic approaches to Biblical interpretation. One of my best friends from high school is a Lutheran minister now with very social liberal views; and upon asking him how he handles the Bible's stance on homosexuality, he literally responded "The Bible says a lot of things."

I suppose pushing idealogies into two opposing groups makes things easier to digest...though it'd be nice if people were more open minded to the world around them.

There are two types of peoples in this word. Fools, and those who realize that there are far more than two types of people in this world.

Maher trying to push the atheist agenda :O