Academy of Sciences of Heroesland

To be honest, the vast majority of "olol-atheists" are no less... a perfectly fair justification.

Well, this only applies to staunch atheists, those who don't allow for the possibility that they might be wrong. Those who always use the primitiveness of the opponent's views as their main argument in a dispute. In short, just fools. And unfortunately, there are many fools everywhere.

Agnosticism seems closer to me, but I wouldn't say I'm in doubt. Rather, I simply allow for the possibility of the existence of a god, and that's it. I don't need anything from him, I live my life and live according to my moral principles, and I don't bother with any organized religion. And besides, I don't see the point in fiercely believing in a god or fiercely denying him; neither atheists nor believers have any arguments to support their point of view, and besides, we will all be there in due time and find out.

There is a downside to this. Without a more or less clear ideology, a person cannot clearly know how to act in a given situation. For example, when atheists need to make an important decision, they say that it is logical. Christians are guided by what God commanded (well, and logic, of course, too :D). But how do agnostics explain their choice? It seems to me that this is not an easy task, which in some cases can lead to a mistake that could have been avoided with a clear ideology.