Hi.\n\nI don't really have a problem with agnostics, but, then again, it all comes down to your definition of the word. If "agnostic" means someone who is skeptical about god, but not quite able to say "There is no god!" I'm fine with that. I'm very much up in the air about a lot of issues and even have opposing viewpoints about some things. It's fine to not be able to come to a hard opinion about certain things.\n\nThe issue that I do have is when agnosticism means: "The existence of god is unknowable." I just can't buy that explanation. From where I sit, everything is knowable. We may not have the tools to find the answer, or even the mental software to grasp the answer, but this doesn't mean that it is "unknowable."\n\nNow, I don't think I have a better term than "agnostic," but I do know that there has been some backlash lately (not here) from certain people who feel that people like me (hard-atheist/skeptics) have co-opted the term "skeptic" and taken away its "actual" meaning (which closely means "examiner," as opposed to "loud-mouthed nay-sayer.") These people are trying to reestablish a more traditional school of skepticism under the name zetecism (closely meaning "seekers.)\n\nSo, I don't know. Do some research and you might find that you're actually a Zetetic. I realize that it can be a difficult thing for a young woman to learn that she is actually a member of an ancient Greek school of thinking that the majority of people on Earth have never heard of, but it is a rite of passage that we must all go through. :)