Atheism and vegetarianism

[Existentialist]

I tend to take the etymologically purist line...

Well, clearly not always. The pure, true, original, proper non-bastardized meaning for "agnosticism" as defined by Huxley, you do not seem to accept.

As I said, it's a tendency, and I pick and choose. Words are our servants, not our masters.

---

As for the arguments getting heated; that tends to happen when one side is arguing from nonsensical definitions.

I think the heat comes from one side insisting that they are absolutely incontrovertibly right and that anybody who disagrees with them is objectively wrong. Once a person has positioned themselves thus, they often believe they acquire the right to denigrate and insult others. It's the Dawkins bin liner syndrome which goes something like "I have observed objective truth, therefore those with personal beliefs or opinions who disagree with my truth are deserving of my disdain." In the existentialist atheist - versus - rationalistic atheist debate, it is the rationalists who tend to turn up the heat first out of frustration that their "truth" hasn't been submitted to.

---

atheism & agnosticism aren't mutually exclusive positions when you look at what they actually mean (as opposed to what you think they mean, or believe they mean).

What you mean is, what you believe to be the "correct" meaning of atheist and agnostic. You may (or may not, it's up to you) downgrade this to the "majority-accepted" meaning, in order to preserve some semblance of righteousness, but you appear to be unable to concede that atheist and agnostic can legitimately mean different things to different people, and that a mature debate between equals involves two sides comparing their personal meanings for words in a mutually respectful way. Down that route I suppose lies respect for religion - something an existential atheist can easily embrace, but something that a rationalistic atheist will generally not countenance.