Your viewpoint has merit.

You made my point for me. An atheist's belief is reactive if they feel compelled to validate it to others, whereas I haven't meet a single agnostic who feel compelled to explain their viewpoint as they simply don't care.

I'm aware of Bertrand Russel's metaphor. It is used often in these kinds of discussions.

No water in the glass is the negative value (or positive value) to the reverse value of there is water in the glass.

Agreed, whish is why I left the good/evil axis out of this observation. Lawful and Good are not the same thing and represent two distict axes in this context.

Well, for example, you're endeavoring to impose your belief that your belief is NOT a belief but a non-belief when in my experience isn't the case and hence I don't agree.

Without a trace of sarcasm, pleast let me say that is a very astute and well-described observation.

Incorrect, lack of opinion is the default position (see agnosticism), belief or believing-not-to-believe/non-belief requires a conscious decision either way.

I wasn't bringing the good/evil axis into this dicussion, and my friends and I were discussing it, we all agreed that bringing that axis into the conversation would yield nothing profitable.

Different viewpoints, I imagine.

And yet, atheism claims there is no deity of any kind, yet can offer no proof of their claim, and theism claims there is a deity of some kind, but can likewise offer no proof of their claim.

Belief either way requires effort, and at least in this context I'm equating effort to believe one way or the other to an identical portion of zealotry, wherein agnosticism (absence of belief one way or the other) is a ground-state requiring neither.

No arguement necessary, I stated my beliefs, and you've stated yours.

I'm guessing you don't play D&D much/ever, or never read the definitions of Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral, so for your benefit I'll copy/paste the D&D definition for Lawful from wikipedia.

I see the point you wish you were making, but it has no logic to it.

I know it was PROBABLY just a slip of the keybaord that you phrased that how you did, but I read your statement and get the same shiver down my spine when it was almost verbatim repeated in Serenity...

Tomato, tomato (hey, they sound the same when I read them!).

My friends and I were having a conversation concerning this over D&D a few weeks back, and we concluded amongst ourselves (FWIW) that theism is a Lawful alignment, agnosticism is a Neutral alignment, and atheism is a Chaotic alignment.

IMHO, it takes the same amount of zealotry to believe in existence of a deity or not. Either belief is a value.

Reading the opening lines of the article, I knew that some people would take afront at the "belief in the non-existence of God" line.