it is better to call babies who are just becoming aware, as agnostic than atheist

^^^^^^ See this up here.....It's incorrect^^^^^^^I'm not exactly sure why the other player has litterally not refuted a word I said or told me why he hasn't refuted a word I have said, but this is unacceptable. At this point I can only try to assume why you ignored my arguments.My first thought is that maybe pro thinks his definitions were rules, In this case this assertion is completely unfair because he never said this was the case, I thought he was giving his own definitions supporting his case so of course I also gave my own definition supporting my case.Perhaps Pro thinks that his definitions are correct and mine are incorrect, however if this is the case he should have refuted my arguments, I actually give reasons stemming from the english language itself which support the definition of athiesm and what it means. Or maybe pro wants me to state why these babies aren't just agnostic....Using very simplistic mechanics of the english language I have shown that the word athiest simply means the lack of a positive belief in a god, showing that ignorance also clasifies as atheism. Agnosticism would then most logically mean the intentional refusal to take a position on god, as opposed to never having heard of the idea in the first place. It is to say that you do indeed take a position on the subject but that that position is one which refuses to answer or take a stance on the question. This would be separate from atheism as it involves a completely different meaning than the one I have provided for atheism. So again, agnosticism is intentionally not taking a position, whereas atheism is simply the lack of a positive belief in a deity. I believe this makes the most sense given the derivation of the words themselves. For instance, the derivation of the the word agnostic also languistically shows that pro is incorrect, according to my own criteria.agnosticism= a+gnosticism a= lacking/ without gnosticism= "Gnosticism was a second century heresy claiming that salvation could be gained through secret knowledge. Gnosticism is derived from the Greek word gnosis, meaning "to know." [1]Agnosticism= lacking the secret knowledge needed to gain salvationAt its modern inception, during the late 1800's the word was defined to simply mean that the person didn't have enough concrete or empirical information to decide whether or not god exists. Thus showing that agnostics are people who know about god but simply refuse to make a decision because they can't be sure. This is much different than babies who have no idea about a god and thus can very clearly and easily be classified as athiests and Not agnostics. Perhaps someone could make the argument that because agnostics lacks the (+)belief in god they are still athiests, however let's make one thing clear, just as a rectangle is a square but a square is not a rectangle, in this case an agnostic may be an athiest but an athiest may not be an agnostic. So a baby is an atheist but a baby is not an agnostic in this case.Either way the answer is clear, babies are definitely athiests but are not agnostics. This is according to what the words objectively mean. I expect a valid response from my opponent next round.sources[1] http://christianity.about.com...