I say I prefer not to have dogma, but have no problem with others having theirs'. However I do believe in separation of church and state. If they ask if I am Christian or believe in god, my reply is the existence of a god or absence of one has no effect on me one way or the other. But wouldnt want to deny others their beliefs or philosphies of life, as long as their practice doesnt impede me to be free to have mine.

I really can't say that I'm in the labels either, but if I had to choose one I would think it would have to be "machine wash permanent press setting, air dry"

It depends on the person and the situation: agnostic atheist, atheist, non-believer. I think sometimes it is important to identify as an atheist because people realize that I don't fit their stereotype of an evil atheist.

I'm an agnostic atheist. I have no knowlegde of any god or gods, and I believe in zero gods.

I am an atheist. I do not discuss religion with others. When asked about my religion, I simply say that I am not religious.

I just say, "I don't believe in the supernatural."

Labels don't bother me much except when others start telling me my label. I identify as an agnostic atheist. I credit extensive bible study for my label choice.

Having read some of these responses I think I might just start going with "scientist". If they ask me to elaborate I'll just explain that I'm willing to go with any belief for which there is some evidence.

You can't escape labels, it's like a game of dodgeball. Even tho it may fit, I never liked the term atheist because it defines one in terms of theism, as if that is THE measure. Atheist implies some absence. It says nothing about what I believe, and yet it is a seemingly sufficient end-of-discussion for believers.

I don’t much care what other people might call me, but I don’t identify myself as atheist, agnostic, or theist because I see all of those terms as positions relative to belief in a literal god, and I am no brand of religious literalist. I have taken to calling myself a religious figuratist. But that’s not likely to suit many others on this site.

For me it depends upon the situation. I moved to a fairly conservative area of MN 2 years ago. If I’m in a work situation I just say I’m not religious and most people leave it at that.

My friends all know I’m atheist. I miss where I lived before and felt free to be fully out as an atheist

Labels are defended here only by those who use it profusely with the most cockamamie replies that they, and only they, claim to be factual evidence but is actually bullshit. There are some semantics involved definitely because English is a great language that accepts anything all the time, but really, think about it, is there a word that describes your lack of believe in Santa or the tooth fairy? No, you just say I don't believe in (fill in the blank). Which instantly and semantically puts you in the category of a non believer. All that other labelling bullcrap you will hear from label users is just that, bullcrap.

Always call myself a Broad Church Sceptic, pretty much the same as your non-believer I think. Because I am open to, and accepting of all positions, on the sceptic spectrum, from deist and pantheist to atheist. Since I do not see belief, or not, in a maybe non-existent, and certainly in those cases, non-communicating god, as important. The harm and danger which comes from religion, comes from the cultural baggage it carries with it. And especially the belief, that "my" cultural baggage, is better than anyone else's, because it is, some how, sanctified, or has more authority because it comes from a 'higher' outside source.

Perhaps this sums it up....

I don't like labels

Call it what you like. I am a former Catholic and church goer (up ‘til age 18) and I consider myself an atheist.

I do avoid the use of Atheist due to it's undeserved negative connotations. Non-believer is my choice.

As an agnostic, I neither believe nor disbelieve, since there's no evidence either way.
We can't even agree on what we mean by 'god.' Is it a fictitious "entity," all of creation, or energy itself (which would equal mass times the speed of light squared), or the theoretical 'universal consciousness,' or 'collective unconscious,' or something else?
It might all be hogwash, regardless of any definition anyone could come up with, or it might not.
That's why I'm agnostic. There's reason to believe there are such things as reincarnation and psychism, but even if there is, that doesn't mean there IS a 'god,' or there ISN'T!
Nope, no way of knowing.
You're right: it's all labels and semantics and definitions and theories.

For me, it depends on the capacity in which I am meeting someone. For a friend, it may never really come up. For a potential romantic partner, I want whatever label that lets them know that they can keep on scrolling with their thoughts and prayers.

I’m a non religious freethinker.

I think I'm an Atheist-Christian

Non believer is a good label, however in the long run it does not matter what one calls oneself, it is what one believes that is important. I have found a lot of so called christian people have no clue of what the word agnostic means. Some of them are just so uneducated.

I used to tell people I was agnostic but they informed me I was an atheist. My atheist friends said I was I was two chicken to tell the truth about being atheist.

I write atheists on forms. I tell people who want to invite me to church that I'm an atheist. Atheist is a word the general public thinks they understand and allows me to avoid church invites and participation in nonsensical rites.

I tell myself I don't care whether there's a God or not. I see no purpose in believing or arguing about what box my belief should be put in.

I'm a stranger here myself... ...

I am a me. You can take me or toss me over a bridge.