“Shrugnostic,” meaning I no longer care whether or not there’s a God.
Bravo!! You win.
Did you come up with that yourself? May I use it?
That’s almost as good as my Southie cousin’s general purpose “Nunny.”
As in nunny yafuggin bizness.
I usually tell the clueless-but-non-pushy Christians who just assume everybody they meet is one of their own that I’m a “devout heathen.” I say it with a big smile and a welcoming tone. Confuses the heck out of 'em it does. 
My sister fills in “Independent” on forms that ask for her religion.
I just go with “agnostic”. It’s probably not 100% perfectly accurate, but as I understand it atheist = there is definitely no god. Agnostic = I haven’t a frickin’ clue, and prefer to keep my mind open without picking a “there definitely is” or “there definitely isn’t” hard and fast belief. To me, “there definitely isn’t” has a bit of closed-mindedness to it that is just as ‘bad’ (albeit not as harmful to the world) as religion.
More accurately, I definitely don’t think there’s the bearded guy in the sky and that just doesn’t make any logical sense with many of the original ideas (flat earth etc) being actually disproven, but I’m not ruling out a higher power of a very different type, or the idea that went around earlier in the year that we’re a simulation. We can’t figure out entirely how the universe works, so I think there’s a lot of room for… pretty much anything.
I go with “Buddhist”.
Unafflicted? Still in default mode?
TwiSpark: I agree with your reasoning and conclusions. I’m a hard-atheist with regard to the Abrahamic “omni” God…but respectfully agnostic regarding other possibilities, most definitely including those I’ve never even thought of. The “we’re in a sim” possibility is one that is impossible to disprove; it perfectly explains all that we observe!
That is a big bone of contention as religion does not equal spirituality which spans both belief in God and non-such silly stuff.
Non-religious is fine when you want to drop the subject, but it is kind of like the old days when gay men called themselves “confirmed bachelors” - true, but incomplete. Of course that was before marriage was an option.
The reaction to calling oneself an atheist without attacking religion makes me think that lots of religious people are very insecure in their belief.
Yes. And yes.
Heathen is directly parallel to pagan. Pagan meant the “country” people living in the boondocks, too uneducated to accept Christianity and heathen seems to have come from a Gothic word of similar meaning: uneducated sods living out in the heath who did not accept Christianity.
With the general ignorance of etymology in the world, you are free to use the word, but it may not be the one you really want.
That certainly works on an etymological level, meaning a person who chooses a different opinion or path, (although it carried a connotation of factionalism). However, it suffers the historical insult of having been used by Irenaeus in the second century to identify the Christians who chose to not accept the beliefs of the mainstream church, lending the implication that one’s beliefs may actually coincide, to some extent, with those of the Christians.
Apatheistic has been around for a while.
Why does it need a name? There are theists(or maybe religionists), then there are those that aren’t.
I’ve noticed (admittedly partly because I have a close friend who’s very religious, so there’s natural bias) that almost everyone I’ve seen self-identifying as atheist does a LOT of attacking of religion.
But there are people who ‘just are’ atheists, and those who use it as an identity and a mission in life.
Just as there are many more religionists who do the same. Do you feel the same way about your friend as you do about those who self-identify as atheist?
I’m not sure I’d agree. I’m old enough to have had closeted gay men as friends and acquaintances - my mother worked in the theater industry and knew a dozen in the 1950s. “Confirmed bachelor” was a slippery term and did not mean gay 100% of the time, but someone who had chosen to never marry for a variety of reasons. (For a while, war injuries was a not-uncommon one.)
I think “non-religious” is the most sweeping and accurate term you can use. It unambiguously states you have no religion in your life, at all.
The problem with “atheist,” besides being provoking to too many people on both sides of the argument, is that it feeds into the idea of “no-godism” being just another religion, to be debated and argued on a religious basis. That leads to tiresome and pointless arguments on top of the basic issue of religiosity.
Which is not what “atheist” really means; there are several traditions, commonly understood as religions, which are atheist, or can be atheist depending on interpretations.
Well, and there you have it: the meaning of the word is disputed even among fellow travelers. Does it mean “I am not religious in any way” or “I am spiritual/religious but do not believe in god/s” or “I am a tyrant who thinks no one should have a religion” or… what?
I equate atheist with a-religious; I don’t draw much distinction between faith with or without a god or gods at the head of it. Yes, I regard Buddhism as a religion.
So the search for a new word continues, I guess.