Agnosticism should not be listed under "religion" option in Debate.org user profile

I will now rebut the arguments made by Con in round 3. And make my conclusion. Regarding cons R1Here Con is engaged in equivocation fallacy since the word belief is used in a different sense regarding agnosticism and theism/atheism. Not being sure about does God exists should not be confused with a belief done with making a truth claim about existence of deity. Me believing that we cannot know something is not the same usage of the word believe as in saying I believe that God exists/does not exist. Former is epistemological and latter is metaphysical claim. What Con calls belief in context of agnosticism is simply judgment based on facts regarding epistemological truth and belief in context of theism is religious faith or in atheism it is lack of religious faith. Those beliefs are not mutually exclusive so they are obviously not the same. I don't think that the effects are minimal to none for which I argued in round 3. Even If I was to grant the importance of this opinion, it would still be wrong to have it under religion. I do not argue that we should remove it entirely, I'm arguing that standing by itself it should be not an option under religion label in information panel. Regarding cons R2Those other options are statements on belief whether or not God exists. That combined with a knowledge claim which comes from agnosticism part tells us so much more about someone then just agnosticism alone. Also in a case of theism we are talking about religion. While theism is not any particular religion it tells us that that someone is religious just not specified which religion in case (in round 3 I argue that it should be specified in theism subcategory). In a case of atheism we are getting information about someone being non religious. But for agnosticism we cannot tell if that one is religious or not. This is very important. Since how can something that does not address religious belief at all be under the religion tab. Its absurd. Also I agree that atheism is not a religion but it is a statement about not having a religion so it is much more suitable candidate to stay under religion tab in information panel. "Furthermore, I urge my opponent to look at the title he chose. He says we should remove the agnostic option from the religion option. Not that we should include others, in place of it. If we were to accept the action he proposes, there would just be no agnostic option, which is, as I said, the silencing of an opinion. "Including others in place of it is a solution to the problem of categorical mistake. If someone has dying urge to define himself as an agnostic He is free to do so. Just not under wrong category. There is option to write about himself and about beliefs to the extent of 1000 characters. So write It down for all you like. Putting wrong option under religion tab is not right way of practicing freedom of opinions. If it was then it should allow all possible wrong and right opinions under religion category. Which is absurd. Not letting some child to put hakuna matata under religion would be silencing an opinion. Not letting trolls have their own satire religions would be silencing their opinions. You cant have double standards here. Rebuttal of cons Closing statementsI proposed that something which is misleading by itself in a context of specific category "RELIGION" stops being misleading by letting it accompany religious view ( theism or atheism). Just like self employed under occupation is misleading but it is not if it is accompanied by true occupation. For example self employed car mechanic. "He proposes DDO moderators silence an opinion because it is technically incorrect. "I propose of either expanding it or removing it from this particular category since it does not fit there by itself. If this was not picked from the list, but left to user to write down then I would not have a problem of user making a mistake. But for site to support this wrong way of thinking is wrong on so many different levels. Also there is infinite possibilities of technically incorrect opinions. Should we include them all ? Information panel loses its purpose then. CONCLUSIONAs Con said, the purpose of information panel is to help us know other users better. That's why we got so many different categories. That's why we need those to be very accurate and cover many different fields of human interests and views/opinions. So giving people technically incorrect option under some category is misleading and what's even worse renders that category arbitrary. When under my religion I put something that neither tells if I'm religious or not, nor which religion I follow then what's the purpose of that category other then letting me be vague on the topic and technically incorrect as an predefined option. I can be agnostic and being religious and I can be agnostic and not being religious. If debate. org is gonna limit users to the predefined list of religions then any technically incorrect option is direct support of this sort of ignorance. This community deserves better so vote for Pro. I would like to thank Con for participation and some very interesting arguments. Its been fun. I hope that some moderator casts a vote there to see what "officials" think of this.