I have changed the blog title to 'The agnostic fence' as this is where I currently position myself. No longer an atheist, but no convert by any means.
So fellow fence sitters, are we in the best position possible?
Agnosticism is the ignored grey area of the religious divide, mostly because an input of 'i dunno' isn't perhaps seen as a useful one. However I think agnosticism has a lot of positives and especially in the arena of apologetics, a debate panel should never be without its agnostic referee.
Agnosticism, and I am generally talking about agnostics with an interest or knowledge in theism, promotes a tolerance that perhaps atheists and theists don't have. Although some atheists are by design agnostic because they will say that they can't say with 100% certainty that a creator doesn't exist, this is mainly semantics and philosophy. Richard Dawkins would say so because he is a man of logic and applies his own logic to the intricacies of proof, but he is no fence sitter. Agnosticism is separate, agnostics may pray every now and then, may believe in evolution, read a range of religious texts. They may also perceive media deemed controversial or offensive to a religious person with an active impassive eye, allowing for unbiased criticism or praise.
My granddad says you have to pick a side, in life and in general, but I am not sure in this case that I can. I find the beauty in the possibility and the beauty in the explanation. To treat others as you wish to be treated, to harm no one, to be compassionate to living things and respect others life choices- these are the things I hold dear to me, I understand it is not enough for some and sadly too much for others.