Oh, right. Well, I do not function in such a manner. Rather, I will only believe in something or reject it once "the various forms of logic, belief, argument, system, etc. behind it" have been proven or disproven(to a certain degree).
Alas, I see the world as a giant environment full of variable factors and so on, so I rarely believe or disbelieve in anything anymore. Instead, I accept thoughts, ideas, incidents, etc. as things that may or may not have happened and also in terms of degrees of "defining/undefined factors" and so on.
Anyways, since a god or deity can't really be proven or disproven for now, so why believe or disbelieve in it? Therefore to me, these "things" are just a "great big unknown", just one of the mysteries of the universe. I have other things to spend my time and efforts on, after all.
And yes, I'm starting to arrive at a certain train of thought that I might just be crazy.
Edit: So, if I'm not really an agnostic or atheist or even religious, then what am I?
Yes. Well, I get that completely, Dee, and certainly do not mean to suggest that there is anything "wrong" with your point of view.
My point is really more general than that. What I mean to say is that so-called "atheism" is not denial or disbelief, just lack of belief which stems from having no real reason to believe.
After all, if I don't believe that unicorns exist (which I don't) no one questions that or argues against it. My "a-unicornism" is simply accepted. Even though unicorns exist in many accounts and stories, I simply have no reason to believe in them, and no one questions that or asks me to be "agnositic" on the question. That is how I feel about so-called "god." I am not a believer, and see to reason to believe, so I am an atheist, not agnostic, by definition.
I find the illogic of self-described believers like Whitewolf to be a kind of support for atheism actually. If proving an idea means that logic must be tortured to such an extent, there must be something wrong with the idea that such a logic seeks to prove.