If I tell you my best reason for labeling myself as an Agnostic Humanist, will you tell me one reason why you do NOT come out with the same label.
My reason : Humanists do things in a correct and respectful manner in to organize changes in the laws of a country that produce changes in attitude to religious practices and beliefs.
Labels can be useful as shorthand descriptors, but they can also be silly and restrictive as well. Does the fact that I try to put the interests of the human race above my own define me as a Humanist? Or the fact that I choose to default to a non-theistic path of reasoning make me an Agnostic? When it comes to wearing ideologies, I prefer the nudist approach. I left the badge fetish behind with my childhood.
First off I'm not agnostic, I'm an atheist.
Secondly the definition I found for "humanist" on dictionary.com is: a person having a strong interest in or concern for human welfare, values, and dignity.
Although I do think those things are important, I would not say that I have a "strong interest in or concern". Thinking civil injustice should not exist is not the same as "having a strong interest or concern". I wouldn't label myself the opposite of "humanist" whatever that is.
Really "humanist" just seems to me like the new political buzzword being thrown around the internet by people who don't like being called social justice warriors. From what I see most of these "humanists" don't do anything other than "raise awareness" which seems like a gentle way to say they hunt for likes by posting videos displaying racism and adding a harsh caption.