@pwnobi:
@Demon Rin:
If you want to classify Atheists by a numerical tier, then go for it(not sarcasm, that actually makes sense). However, I just think it's hilarious to see people preaching about ignorance, then throw a blanket statement over Atheists saying they believe that God doesn't exist. To be Atheist can simply encompass the lack of the belief in the existence of a god. In other words, rather than Atheist being the antonym for theism, it's merely the absence of theist beliefs. This may seem like playing semantics, but there's a lot of important and distinct differences that come in to play. Most notably, people assume they're agnostic because they don't want the negative connotation of being an Atheist; they don't want to say "God does not exist," they just don't feel comfortable saying "God does exist," either. People who feel this way, and don't feel confident in either extreme, can still be an Atheist. However, due to people being unable to comprehend this line of thought, Atheists get stiffed, and mislabeled.
Actually, by definition of the word, Atheism IS the exact opposite to Theism.
Someone or some species of animal who is "Asexual" doesn't "just abstain from the Idea of sex, while still being able to want it"
Someone who is Asexual flat out DOES NOT get sexually aroused. Someone who wants it but abstains is called "Celibate". It's the reason there are 3 terms, and not just two.
You're just repeating the argument that those atheists arguing about the terminology make all the time. They fight about what to call themselves.
There are Atheists who would actually fight you when you say that, and tell you that ANY belief in God, or any entertainment of the notion of there being a god, denotes you as not being a True Atheist.
Richard Dawkins, again, made that list of a 1-7 scale (remember, 1 is a pure theist, 7 is pure atheist)
He rates himself as a "6" on the scale as he truly believes there is no god, but cannot know for sure, and he makes sure to call himself a "De facto Atheist", saying he cannot be a true atheist because he is not a 7.
Remember, he makes sure to qualify himself as something OTHER than a True atheist, because he's NOT a true atheist, because he says he cannot know for sure there is no god.
(Definition - De Facto: Being in practice but not being adhered to by law or definition". Meaning, he is an Atheist in belief, but cannot call himself a True atheist because he doesn't fit the proper definition)
I make sure to use terms to denote the differences. I agree with the atheists who say you can't be a true atheist if you believe there might be a god, Either you're an Atheist, an Agnostic Atheist, an Agnostic, An Agnostic Theist, or a Theist.
Either you believe and profess to "Know" there is no God, you believe there is no god, but don't claim to know, you're split down the middle on the subject, you believe there is a god, but profess not to know for sure, or you dogmatically believe there is a god.
That's the reason we have like 7 terms for it.
If you consider yourself Atheist and believe there is no god, yet entertain the notion that there may be one, you simply are not a true Atheist, you're An Agnostic Atheist.
Just like you say the term Atheist has that connotation that some people don't want to be associated with, it sounds like you're doing the same thing with Agnostic. You say it is equated to people who are weak-willed and don't want to admit to being an Atheist. I think some people, possibly you too, now don't want to be seen as being that weak-willed person who won't "Admit" to being an atheist.
Short Version: You can be an atheist and still entertain the notion of there being a god, but then you aren't a true atheist. You aren't what other atheists call a "Strong" Atheist, you are an "Agnostic Atheist" or a "Weak Atheist" based on whom you ask. (I prefer Agnostic Atheist. "Weak" atheist sounds like a put-down)