The definetion of atheism

[Esquilax]

Hey Esq.
I'm just saying how it looks from where I'm standing.

And what we need you to see is that you may not be looking at things from a completely objective viewpoint. Let's face it, we two groups argue a lot here, and in general, and for you guys that takes up a sort of cosmic importance, because we're disagreeing with you on a universal scale. It's understandable that there'll be some heat there, and it's human nature- on both sides of this- to perhaps dig in one's heels when confronted with an argument.

What you see, and what we actually believe in a calm and neutral setting, are different things.

Yes, I DO accept how theists appear to you may not be how they want to be viewed.
It IS in the eye of the beholder. There's no desperation to see you in some contrived way.

I hope not. It just becomes a sort of pattern that we get quite a lot, and it becomes very frustrating when it appears that people are talking for us rather than letting us do our own speaking. It's almost an accusation that we're being dishonest, you know.

Just answer the question.
God -yes. God - no. God -maybe.
Isn't it true that agnostics say "maybe" and atheists say"no"?

Maybe. And that's not contradictory with atheism, either; it's antitheists that say there's no god. See, agnosticism details what you claim to know- the root word is gnossis, meaning knowledge, after all- and a/theism is what you claim to believe. I, and most of the other atheists here, are agnostic atheists: lacking belief in a god without outright denying the possibility.

Outright denying it would be as much an intellectually dishonest position as outright accepting one- gnostic theism or atheism- because we don't know everything yet. I might not find the arguments for a god to be especially deserving of belief, but that doesn't say a damn thing about an actual god, just the arguments themselves.