My use/definition of Agnostic is that we Know, we don't Know - we don't know how we came to be in this strange event - what happened before we were born or what will happen after we die -
technically being an Atheist is having a belief too, - the belief that death is the end/nothingness - even tho no one knows.

You got it all wrong. Agnostics simply don't ask questions we can't possibly answer. Intellectually speaking, every faith's argument for their belief runs into a wall they try to dodge before eventually claiming faith in place of fact. Agnostics are usually people who see these holes in the stories. We are still moral for the sake of a better world, we just don't need all the other arguments and we don't need a god to make us be moral.

I don't believe IN anything, but my OPINION is yes there is an afterlife, and yes a system of reward and punishment would seem to be in place. I think morality and ethics spring from 'natural law' (look it up) and are innate in most people.
I don't consider my self 'insecure,' just think 'belief' is inappropriate when it comes to such matters.
On what do you base your "beliefs?" If nothing concrete and substantial, they are more appropriately called OPINIONS.
Yes I have MANY opinions. They sometimes change from one moment to the next. I have no rigid core 'beliefs' to which I cling and defend. I don't attack others' opinions unless they are doctrinaire and inviolate. This is hubris and often hypocritical...THEIR opinions are unquestionably true, mine are suspect. I object to that attitude.

I’d think that agnostics don’t know if there is an afterlife and make no claims about its nature. IMO it is irrational to have beliefs or disbeliefs about things that you have no way of knowing or understanding.

From a cosmic perspective the question of an afterlife is nothing but meaningless claptrap. Space and time are just parameters that we use to construct our imaginary world. You can not impose your artificial model on ultimate reality—it won’t fit. It would make more sense to ask if there is a current life and if any part of it is real, or if current life is wholly imaginary.

The question about morality and ethics is a separate and unrelated matter IMO. There is nothing profound or divine about behavior patterns. We have evolved to behave in certain ways toward each other, and similar patterns can be seen in the behavior of animals. Ethics and morality are basic nuts and bolts living habits like diet, cleanliness, etc and have no significance from a cosmic perspective. That is my opinion but I am not totally sure.

"Agnostics are unsure of their honest beliefs. Do agnostics believe in an afterlife? If so, are there rewards and punishments for the way life is lived? Where do morality and ethics spring."

Well the first sentence is uncontroversial. Agnosticism is about acknowledging limitations to certainty.

But in what follows you switch to asking what agnostics believe. I wouldn't expect to find much agreement there. It is natural enough for those who acknowledge their limited certainty to nonetheless have hunches or operational beliefs regarding those uncertain matters. Most tend to regard the prospect of an afterlife as they do a god as unlikely. So we live our lives without regard to gods or an afterlife. But Christians too can acknowledge agnosticism. The difference is they choose to live their lives in the hope that what they wish for will be true. They call it faith, a far different thing than the belief of apologetics or mania of the deranged we more often run into. Personally I think a measure of agnosticism just shows you're paying attention.

Almost everyone is agnostic about almost everything, so asking what agnostics have to say about X is basically the same asking what people have to say about X. The answer is that they will say countless, widely varied things.

On what basis do you claim that agnostics are unsure of their honest beliefs?

Morality and ethics are ultimately driven by evolution.

Personally, my honest belief is that there is no god. However, I don't feel like I can prove there isn't, so Agnostic seems like the more logical choice over Atheism.

I do not believe there is an afterlife, but there are rewards and punishments for living life a certain way. If you break laws your punishment is guilt, fines, jail time, etc. If you do drugs, your punishment is addiction, dependence, money issues, etc. Alternatively, if you are kind and caring towards others, your reward can be feeling good, friendship, love, etc. If you help animals or do volunteer work, you're often rewarded with pride, support, accomplishment, etc.

For me, morality and ethics spring from within. It is as simple as it feels good to do good, it feels bad to do bad.

Can’t speak for anyone else but the existence of a god or not is irrelevant to me. Life after death, don’t know but will find out at some point, Moralities are socially implanted, ethics are internal

I imagine that agnostics are as sure or unsure of their beliefs as any other person. Some are quite sure that the truth cannot be known for certain, others suppose that it can but isn't yet, and still others think that they already know it.

This distribution of certainty is, by the way, about the same among the religious...but it's the agnostics, not the religious, who will say so out loud.