No Religion? 7 Types of Non-Believers
Religious labels help shore up identity. So what are some of the things non-believers can call themselves?Catholic, Born-Again, Reformed, Jew, Muslim, Shiite, Sunni, Hindu, Sikh, Buddhist . . . . Religions give people labels. The downside can be tribalism, an assumption that insiders are better than outsiders, that they merit more compassion, integrity and generosity or even that violence toward “infidels” is acceptable. But the upside is that religious or spiritual labels offer a way of defining who we are. They remind adherents that our moral sense and quest for meaning are core parts of what it means to be human. They make it easier to convey a subset of our deepest values to other people, and even to ourselves.
For those who have lost their religion or never had one, finding a label can feel important. It can be part of a healing process or, alternately, a way of declaring resistance to a dominant and oppressive paradigm. Finding the right combination of words can be a challenge though. For a label to fit it needs to resonate personally and also communicate what you want to say to the world. Words have definitions, connotations and history, and how people respond to your label will be affected by all three. What does it mean? What emotions does it evoke? Who are you identifying as your intellectual and spiritual forebears and your community? The differences may be subtle but they are important.
If, one way or another, you’ve left religion behind, and if you’ve been unsure what to call yourself, you might try on one of these:
1. Atheist. The term atheist can be defined literally as lacking a humanoid god concept, but historically it means one of two things. Positive atheism asserts that a personal supreme being does not exist. Negative atheism simply asserts a lack of belief in such a deity. It is possible be a positive atheist about the Christian God, for example, while maintaining a stance of negative atheism or even uncertainty on the question of a more abstract deity like a “prime mover.” In the United States, it is important to know that atheist may be the most reviled label for a godless person. Devout believers use it as a slur and many assume an atheist has no moral core. Until recently calling oneself an atheist was an act of defiance. That appears to be changing. With the rise of the “New Atheists” and the recent atheist visibility movement, the term is losing its edge.
More: http://www.alternet.org/belief/155685/No_Religion%3F_7_Types_of_Non-Believers_/
I thought this was fascinating, hadn't ever thought about it much, had no idea that there could be so many genres of nonbelievers. I'm still not sure which one I am.
= new reply since forum marked as read
Definitely an Agnostic Atheist. I can be a skeptic and anti-theist and so far I am in agreement with most Humanist philosophies I've been presented.
I'm probably not as activist as the article implies for anti-theism and skepticism. I'm not scientifically trained well enough to go out and actively debunk. I don't count my snarking on Facebook as true activism - lol - I mostly do that to pick on my little brothers and what friends from high school who have bothered to remain my FB friends. (I graduated in 1981 from a Baptist run christian school).
I guess I'm not a pantheist - that seems almost like believing in "The Force". But I'm open to being educated on how it's not. (for one thing, the Force has actual, demonstrable properties. It's a good thing for a lot of people I can't shoot electricity out my fingers. 
)
but I do
and that gave me
a smile too.
I mean, what would be the point? I don't share their beliefs, but they're entitled to believe whatever they want, doesn't affect me. As for the rest of the world, my lack of religion doesn't come up in ordinary conversation. Aside from close relatives, I really don't know what most people I know believe or if they belong to a church, though I'm guessing not. Maybe some go on holidays. The only reason I posted this article was that I found it interesting to examine what I do or don't believe, since I'd really never given it much thought before, so I just passed it on in case others here were interested. My motives were no more than that. 
And the R/T room is a place for believers AND freethinkers.
(Or lack of them) before. It never dawned on me that there were philosophical differences in nonbelievers, or that Unitarians (and I have known several) were considered nonbelievers. I saw myself in many of the descriptions, so I found this thought provoking. I'm pretty tolerant, tend to accept people as they are as long as they aren't proselytizing, so I found this to be an exercise in self-examination. I hardly found this to be insulting or disturbing, just made me think, is all. 
that 'strong' VS 'weak' was dependent on the presence or absence of a positive assertion regarding the non-existence of a supernatural deity, rather than any one particular god concept.
Just shows to go ya that even these more common terms aren't globally accepted by atheists... so I guess it's 'good luck' to the article's author getting atheists to go along with 'positive' and 'negative'.
How about 'angry' VS 'appeasing' atheists? Heheh. Surely there's a wedge laying around here somewhere! 
