"I think that the state of non-believing is the normal state of things"
Well that is your error I think.
WE are the minority, the majority were indoctrinated as children and never devote any deep thought to the issue, they just believe.
I was not able to do that. Presented with the issue as a reality as a child I determined that if that were true I needed to know all I could, and that quest revealed the Emperor had no clothes.
80% or more believe, so the "normal" state of affairs for the majority is belief.
As such non belief required a label.
80% of adults do not believe in Santa.

I was told by an agnostic coworker that I was the most militant atheist he knows. I truly think he was responding to my comfort level with being an atheist and an antitheist. I think when I truly came to understand how sad and silly religion is, it truly cemented my comfort level in my own beliefs. I'm pretty much through being passive when someone else tries to shove their religion on me. I'm me, love me or hate me, I'm still going to be me.

I have considered myself To be 'atheist' for quite a while, but lately have considered the term 'agnostic atheist' to be (for the moment) a closer fit. That is, I don't believe,that god(s) exist, but accept that I can't prove it, so can't claim an evidentiary conclusion.

I don't refer to myself as Atheist or Agnostic. I prefer the term Rationalist. My beliefs are rooted in science, which does not make claims that cannot be proven, yet acknowledges that not all the facts are known.

I don't like labeling people, and too often people define themselves based on labels they have either given themselves or been given. When involved in conversation regarding religion and asked about my religious beliefs I generally state that I am not a believer in religious stories or the gods included in the stories. The only time I use the term Atheist is when I want to cut short conversation with someone determined to enlighten me.

Suggest you have a good look at the available definitions of words/phrases like atheist, agnostic, agnostic atheist etc, and then go with whatever label you feel currently comfortable. It may change over time, as mine has, but that's no biggie; just a reflection of the developmental nature of life and the living of it. Wikipedia is a good place to start! Good wishes on your journey...

I have been an atheist since age 13. The word "atheist" is defined as:

"Atheist (noun):

1. a person who denies or disbelieves the existence of a supreme being or beings." (Dictionary.com)

That's good enough for me.

So you are uncomfortable because of what they think. Perhaps time to be comfortable and have a chance for them to learn if they are right about the label. Atheist is just fine, letting them say we know their gods exist and want to rebel against them is a terrible bit of logic. Arguing over the null hypothesis is a good place to start. Challenging the assertion we inherently want to believe is important to get them communicating honestly.

Very comfortable.

If asked, I describe myself as an agnostic atheist, which does help to define my position for some but totally confuses "others".

I'd argue that the state of believeing, of finding an explanation for the natural world, is a fundamental human instinct. Religion began with animism, an attempt to understand natural phenomenon by attributing spirits to features of the environment - including fellow animal species - which evolved into polytheistic mythologies, like those of ancient Greece that we're familiar with, that sought to make the unknown knowable (as in the story of Echo explaining the reverberation of sound to a people unfamiliar with the concept of sound waves), to be co-opted, organized and more narrowly formulated under the control of a politically powerful priest class once the invention of farming had led to permanent settlements. Today we turn to science (itself originally an offshoot of philosphy - the structured process of coming to terms with understanding our existence within the world) - and rapidly advancing technology to gain understanding of what, it turns out, is a mind-bogglingly complex planet, much less universe. The Hubble telescope now provides the insights once given by shaman and, much later, self-serving priesthoods.

I am ok with it because is more pervasive than santa- who only comes once a year and kids do at least know hes not real quite early on in their life.same goes for the tooth fairy its an adults jokey game to with children and nothing to do with . But is pervasive and can be cultish so I find the word 'atheist 'fine . I rarely have to use it but its there if I am called upon to account for myself and am willing to share my situation. A lot depends upon who is asking.

I agree with Sam Harris, we don't have a term for people who don't believe in sasquatch, why do we need a word for people who don't believe in Set?

Unfortunately, I've found many who say they're atheist are really anti-theists and not fun to chill with.

I think belief in the supernatural is still the majority view so I have no problem with being self defined as atheist for now. I do get your point though.

In the UK we still find it odd that one should fear be 'outed' as an atheist - I wear it like a badge. or does religion have a stranglehold on the US?

I don't really like being labeled. In this case though, I agree with how you feel about conceding to their insanity when I label myself as an atheist. I prefer to just call myself a non-delusional sane person. I try to avoid talking to religious folks if I can help it. Unfortunately, that tends to build a fairly lonely life.

Who cares about labels? Why does anyone worry about how others define them? If I were to label myself I say that I am a non-theist - separates me from the a@@hats at the various atheist groups that exist. That being said I'm not aware of ever being labeled because I don't talk about it - becoming a "non-believer" wasn't the most important decision that I ever had to make. It doesn't define me and so I see no reason to discuss it or worry about how others feel about it.

Perfectly content being an atheist. I have failed to believe in so many different gods so far. The next one invented will be just as unbelievable as the previous lot. Of course, many people think that Baal is not being given a fair chance.

Perfectly content being an atheist. I have failed to believe in so many different gods so far. The next one invented will be just as unbelievable as the previous lot. Of course, many people think that Baal is not being given a fair chance.

Perfectly OK with the term.

I am ok with it, but use strong Agnostic most the time.If that confuses them than I give them my Dawkins Scale number and tell them to look it up.

I love it. The religous have a problem with the word not me.

I'm actually agnostic, but it's still a good point.

I don't usually mention my being agnostic, or even think about it, and if some expat Christian starts preaching to me, I quickly distance myself from them. My friends here in Thailand are mostly Muslims, Hindus, Buddhists, and the Europeans are mostly happily heathen.

A rose by any other name
would smell just like an atheist

I suppose it's a bit like Afireman or Amountaineer or Adoctor. Because I'm all of them too.