You're Not Agnostic, You're An Atheist

[LostOne4Ever]

69. How does one avoid making a label?

A lot of this article has to do with the labels and definitions we use when we use the word "atheist" or "agnostic." A lot of us get into a tizzy when it comes to these labels and reading through the comments here I can't help but wonder how do we avoid labeling each other?

I get not wanting to be labeled by others. I really do. But how does one avoid being labeled? I consider myself an implicit atheist. I define it as a lack of belief in any god(s). To me its not a definitive position but simply a lack of one.

Lets says another person, Lets call him/her person A, rejects that definition. And says that an agnostic, not an atheist, is the one without a belief in any gods. Or says

My definition labels person A as an atheist which they reject. Their definition labels me as "not" an atheist which I reject. One person uses a definition of Belief that makes it binary. You either believe or don't believe. Another rejects that. They created a definition that includes a middle ground. Both end up labeling different people differently.

No matter how one approaches this mine field there seems to be no way for one group not to label the other, meanwhile any attempt to have a discussion on related issues is muddles because everyone is using a different definition.

My conservative theist friend refuses to accept the definition of atheism I give him insisting that atheists BELIEVE there is no god. Further that atheism is a religion because religions are beliefs about gods and the the divine. Do I not have a right to tell him he is wrong?

The moment I try he goes and points at someone that rejects the atheist label and uses a definition that claims atheist believe there is no god? Then he points at another and another and another. Whether I like it or not, I shall be labeled by them and any conversation I try to have with my theist friend will be bogged down in endless semantics. This will happen again and again and again. I can not escape it and these type of debates are going on in cases of church and state which means it can affect me.

Its like when Oprah told Diana Nyad that she was not an atheist. Oprah was using her own definition.

Beyond that, how can we ever remove the stigma on the word atheist that was created by hundreds, no thousands, of years of discrimination if people insist on constantly redefining it for fear of being associated with something they view as being negative? NDT, for example, used the word "atheist behaviour." In so doing hasn't he only given another voice to the stigma? Not only that, but an authoritative voice in the minds of countless people. How am I to convince anyone that the "A" word is not a dirty word when a respected scientist like him says that?

How am I to help bring about change when there can never be an objective definition? Again, I get not wanting to be labeled; but is it too much to ask for something to point to so that I can either go "see, I am right." or go "Oops. You are right and I am wrong."