And what if i want to be Funny Agnostic or Quirky Agnostic?

@TheMiddleWay yeaaah... i got to that part... once i read down further. I was like, "oh... so NOW he explains it" as im sifting through older responses. lol

@TheMiddleWay hahah It okay man! I mean, your overall point was understood. Its all good.

Sometimes we just happen to miss certain aspects we are wishing to convey, and in this case, it sort of, locked you in place due to an inabilty to edit, but typically, on a whole, your posts are thought-provoking, earnest & sincere in their quest for knowledge and understanding and promote an environment for open discourse.

I cannot say that is a flawed thing what-so-ever regardless of any written oversights, errors or disjointed information. If a person is truly interested in a topic, they will read through the thread. If they read through the thread, they will see your post-explinations and edits.

I wouldn't worry too much about it since the majority of what you bring to this site is valuable and your message is not missed. I was semi-razing you too because I KNOW how doggedly we defend being Agnostic whenever it comes to light. We are both interested in being mindful that our particular breed isn't mistaken nor overlooked. In that knowledge, I did immediately wondered, "there must be a reason he did not add an agnostic option to this poll...albeit, what could that reason be...?" Hence, why I figured if i read through the thread, the answer would be found.

I was sort of... giving you shit, man. Don't you know me by now TMW? I'm scarcastic.

@TheMiddleWay wha... the...??? for real...? you For Real forgot us? you must be... joking...

@TheMiddleWay leaving aside the reference to atheism being irrational which you know me well enough to know I think is absurd, I am pleased you say that this friendly/unfriendly rating is more broadly applicable. But I find this post a little odd. Why would an avowed agnostic who thinks atheism is arguably irrational post on this about atheism? I sense an attempt at another agenda stemming from your disapproval of atheism. Still, it has resulted in some interesting comments. But I find these simplistic terms, friendly or unfriendly, of little depth or meaning.

@TheMiddleWay so your statement "If we extend the concept, the agnostic could make the claim that both atheism and theism are irrational because neither accept their justification for agnosticism" is not your view but what a hypothetical agnostic could say. Is that right? Okay, but why would you present a hypothetical view of an agnostic if you don't agree with it.? Hypothetically an agnostic could make a variety of claims. It's not unreasonable to assume from reading the comment that you agreed with this statement.

Oh, by the way, my earlier comment " Or are agnostics by definition always friendly, so the question doesn't apply" was meant humorously. I should have added a smilie.

@TheMiddleWay I've never assumed you were an unfriendly atheist. Never said so. I do strong think you are an ambiguous agnostic. I did refer to your reference about atheism being irrational, and I still don't know if your "the agnostic could claim .....irrational " statement applies to you. As to your agenda your antipathy towards the atheist position is quite clear, you come at it from different ways, though I know you'll reply in the negative. You play clever word tricks in your posts, "The agnostic could claim..." for example, but I'm not fooled by them.

@TheMiddleWay you are impossible to deal with. @NotConvinced is right about you and straw man arguments. Look at below:

"... yet you said,
""Why would an avowed agnostic who thinks atheism is arguably irrational post on this about atheism? ""
As I am "the avowed agnostic who posted on this", clearly you did paint me as an unfriendly atheist, as one who stated atheism was irrational (something I've never done)."

So, avowed agnostic = irrational atheist.

That's in your mind. Your extraction.

I simply asked you if your statement " the agnostic could make the claim that atheism and theism, are irrational..." was your view as an agnostic, but you are evasive about it. I also previously stated that, OK, perhaps that isn't your view, but asked why did you state it. You reply by huffing and puffing about being painted as an unfriendly atheist.

And just for the record, I don't think you are an unfriendly atheist. I think you are so residually scared of your God that your intellectual mind can longer accept as true but your emotional mind can't let go of, you wouldn't dare call yourself anything but an agnostic. And no I don't have to ask you a million questions to determine that, as reading your stuff over months (like your ramble yesterday that faith equals personal 'evidence' ) reveals all. You're not the first residue religious agnostic I've encountered in my life. But you are one of the most self righteous.

@TheMiddleWay no, the false equivalence was yours, and I was pointing it out, you missed the point, again.

Now you're speaking "for the site" ? Well, why not, middle, or whatever your name is.

@TheMiddleWay you are definitely an odd individual.

@TheMiddleWay

Yes, there are. It's part of the spectrum.

Very few, but I have come across a couple.

@evidentialist Yeah, now that I think about it, that makes sense. There are agnostic theists just like there are agnostic atheists.

@SallyMc -- The varying shades of human existence.

@SallyMc -- Where in the site's literature does it say, "No theists allowed?" There is even provision for the varying shades of belief/unbelief built right into the questions asked to provide information about members. But even if that were not the case and NO THEISTS ALLOWED was printed in giant red letters on the site's home page, there would be no guarantee that theists wouldn't be here.