Awokens. Or Ancient Astronaut Theorists are my comfortability words

I'm very comfortable with the word Atheist because it is shorter way of saying I don't believe that a god exists. But I agree that it's strange that there is the need for a word that decribes nonbelief in something.

Totally. Put the letter 'A' in front of a word and it means 'without'. For example asymmetrical means without symmetry. Afocal means without a focus. Atheist means without a deity. Doesn't mean you don't believe in one, it just means you don't have one. That's how I would describe it. I think most people, including a lot of this group, tend to believe it means you don't believe (and I don't). Again, that's my own description. Your mileage may vary

Wow, a lot of comments here, I'll try to keep it short. I have no problem with the word, even if it is a backwards way of defining it. I think it's useful because in our society it is a "thing" so it's useful to have a word to talk about it.

I am comfortable with the word. Adult is the word I use for people who don't believe in the tooth fairy, or Santa clause, Atheist is the word I just for rational thinkin adult. Religious is the word I used for people who believe in unicorns, talking asses and Noah arc. it means the same thing as delusional.

I don't think there's a label that I'd be LESS uncomfortable with. The labels is far less of a problem than the simple fact that you're taking up an unpopular minority position in a society where, historically, theism has had tremendous hegemony and structural support.

Agnosticism perfectly describes my knowledge position about deities; Atheism perfectly describes my belief position. They influence each other but are not the same thing. That is why I characterize myself as an agnostic atheist.

It's not a PRACTICAL problem in my view though. In Real Life (IRL) the topic VERY seldom comes up and is even MORE seldom discussed. In person, people reflexively avoid discussion of politics and religion and look for common ground. Well okay, maybe not in the Bible Belt, but in more REASONABLE places.

The only time my atheism comes up is in online conversations like this where people come together to specifically ask and answer these questions. And exactly twice, face-to-face, in my quarter-century as an atheist.

Once, one of my brothers was emboldened to ask point-blank if I no longer believe. He did not even care to discuss it beyond my simple "yes, I no longer am a believer" answer. He simply said, "that's too bad" and moved on and never brought it up again.

More recently, I started attending a weekly men's group at the senior citizen's center and when introductions were made, it turned out that one of the four other regulars had already been "outed" as an atheist and he openly wondered if I was one too, and I admitted that I was. Ironically, the theist in the group who is by FAR the most religious, is the one I get on best with, so again -- just not a practical problem.

People forget in our polarized times that civilized people can have very different views on some things and still appreciate and respect each other as humans.

I usually just walk away; it's not worth arguing about.

I am very comfortable with the label of "atheist." My readers (Columbia Missourian) know my "religious status" and do not care that I am a non-believer. I rarely get a note saying that I am attacking the religious-right, because those attacks are usually justified. Here in our central Missouri college town, we are fairly liberal in thought. Outside the city, it is a different story but still few complain about my non-belief and the opinions I state in the paper.

How about non-indoctrinated or non-delusional?

Hate it!

Totally in latin it just means without a god -just descriptive nothing else to be said -

Atheist beliefs are still a spiritual statement even if they involve a non-belief in spirits. People tend to like pigeon holing to keep things simple and more organized. If the term helps them to understand me and they show respect for my position, then I am comfortable using the term.

No our A word is 2700 years old most comforting sound ...a prefix negating the negative theos yielding the positive freedom from theism. ...it is the haunting gutteral gawd gott gods which makes me feel threatened by xians jews even the Dalai Lama has hundreds of minor gods in his words tolerated like tolerating rapist priests and 2 living felony popes covering up evidence of rapist priests crimes. ...yes I am a very happy American Atheist born that way staying that way no matter how McCarthyistic TrumpOLINI gets

its just a word and I hate being pigeonholed but its close enough I guess.

I'm ok with it, but it also should be said that the term comes with negative connotations. While most people who have adapted the term know that it is simply a statement of non-belief in a god or gods, many who still believe find it to be an act of rebellion, and find the atheists claiming the term to be acting in direct opposition to their deeply held religious beliefs. We have to work to prove to these people that positive atheism exists, and it's good for all of us.

For reasons explained below, I reject the term Atheist. Note the scale is based on Richard Dawkins books. I consider said books to be a thought experiment. If Dawkins actually takes what he said seriously I no longer consider him to be a serious scientist.

2 scales. 1) What is knowable - gnostic to agnostic. 2) What do you believe - theist to atheist.

I am an extreme agnostic. Evidence is the only form of knowledge that exists. As such I don't consider the 2nd scale valid*. We have no evidence to support the existence or nonexistence of god(s), supernatural, et cetera. Therefore, the 2nd scale is invalid.

• For science to consider a question, it must be quantifiable or verifiable. God is neither.

Point is, if you are theist or atheist, I consider you insane for the exact same reason. You believe something without evidence.

"Atheism is a Religion," they tell us... Off is a tv channel is the appropriate retort that they don't seem to understand.

But to your point --- We should label ourselves. I am not "undecided," I reject Christianity / Religion as myth and superstition. I think about Religion often, how messed up the world is because of it and "Atheism" is my stand against them. (sorry about the sloppy nature of this comment)

I personally like and support labels; they help me self-actualize my identities and feel a little more secure in them but, more importantly, they help people identify with others who share the same beliefs and values. Labels help make you visible to people who need you in their lives.

We all know that atheist, as a word, means without theism. Since theism is so rampant in our culture(s), I don't have a problem applying that label to myself. I feel it accurately describes me and I like words that accurately describe me.

That said, all of this comes from me as a new atheist. I may be so comfortable with the word, as it applies to me, because I'm used to labels like "Christian" and "Jew." Those labels were very important to me for a long time. I shall have to wait and see if I feel differently about it after I've been doing this longer.

I'm ok with Atheist. Also think we'll of Thinker, and Naturalist.

I'm comfortable with Athiest, free thinker,
Non-believer, simple.

Or, A-religion.

You could say A-santa, or A-fairies, but that includes theias. How about A-fantasy creatures of any kind? It's the handiest "without" word we have.

I am as comfortable with the word atheist as I am with any other reasonably descriptive word.

I prefer "reasonable".

I like it in the same way I like bald as a description of hair.