Exactly what is your definition of outside the box? Because this seems pretty normal from what I've seen.

I don't think being one either makes you a sinister villain out of a 19th century melodrama nor a hero who deserves a gold medal for being one. Right now I am more intrigued by all of these Crunchbase characters- I believe that that must be the headquarters for the Good Justice League Fictions characters:

King Vitaman and Baron Squaltoris, report to Crunchbase, report to Crunchbase! The Dark Evil is threatening Freetonia, repeat...

If you really think being Atheist or Agnostic is living outside the box, then you really are living inside the box.

Living outside of the collection box, maybe.

if someone either does not believe in God or questions if there is a God it is their opinion. I would not get bent out of shape if someone said this to me.I may not agree myself would not present them with piles of religious material pushing them to believe. my husband is agnostic and it does not bother me. his brother is devoutly religious. He has never told his very Christian brother of his beliefs because he knows what a hissy he would have over it. at least my husband has never been obnoxious about his feelings unlike his holier than thou brother who insults people every chance he gets informing them how "evil" he thinks they are and how He disaproves of them because he is a Christian.

It's entirely up to them, I have a friend who is agnostic, and I am not interested in "saving" or "telling them about the good word".

If you don't believe in any "higher power" or are on the fence (like me), that is your right. I have a problem when people make fun or harass people about their religous choice, or lack their of.

Live under dogma and prejudice- have little or no fear of past traditions that inhibit research, freedom, and inquiry.  A true testament that respects the pioneering American spirit- yet they are treated like the problem instead of the solution.  Mainstrem Europe learned, our less literate population (in some cases) will simply take longer. . .religion is far too often (and far too much) based on fear, and we are learning the hard way that fear is no way to live or govern. . .

I'm convinced everybody should righteously adhere to the absolutely inerrant dogma of Orthodox Catholic Sufi High Church Unitarian Presbyterian Seventh Day Adventist Agnostic Fundamentalism!

You nailed it, kamylienne, as far as I'm concerned. I don't believe in things for which I see no evidence (others can; it's called faith), but I'm open to considering any evidence that might sometime reveal itself. I also fit within the dictionary definitions of an agnostic: (a) One who believes it is impossible to know whether there is a God; (b) One who is skeptical about the existence of God but does not profess true atheism.

I have no quarrel with most of those who have faith and believe in a supreme being; usually they are moral people, and I make no pretense of having superior insight or judgment about supernatural things. But I do quarrel with those who try to force their beliefs upon me, in the guise of their morality or otherwise, and those who profess to be religious but act immorally, usually out of selfishness and greed. Contrary to the opinions of some religious folk, one can be agnostic (or, undoubtedly, atheist) and also intensely moral (I make no such claim for myself), just as one can be religious and also immoral (current examples abound). Religiosity and morality are not codependent, but rather independent, although fortuitously they often coexist in the same person. Too many professed religious folk don't recognize the distinction, instead blindly insisting that those who don't see things their way are wrong, because their god told them so. They don't see the hypocrisies I see--among them, that organized religion has been and continues to be responsible for immense tragedy, suffering, and bloodshed (The Crusades, anyone? Radical Islamism that resulted in al-Qaeda and the Taliban, anyone? The Salem witch-hunts? The genocide of Christian Armenians by the Turks? Bosnia? Ethiopia? Sudan? The professed desire of the madman President of Iran to kill all the Jews in Israel?). Want more examples of religious hypocrisy? How about Jim Bakker, Jimmy Swaggart, Elmer Gantry, Father Charles Coughlin, Oral Roberts (who demanded that his audience give him $8,000,000 or "God would kill him"), Jim Whittington, and most recently, Ted Haggard. Of course, some adherents of organized religion also have done all manner of good things and have acted with compassion for others; Mother Teresa, Billy Graham, and Robert Schuller come readily to mind. I'm absolutely sure that the number of good religious folk vastly outnumber the bad ones, but that doesn't eliminate all the hypocrisies.

The point I'm slipping around but trying to make is that some religious folk can be very arrogant and closed-minded, without justification. I hope, dear reader, you're not one of them. In my mind, striving to be open-minded is a worthwhile, admirable goal. So leave me and my agnosticism and my self-imposed morals alone; I'm content with them, even if you're not and think I should adopt yours. I echo, and adapt to my own purpose, those famous words (found on our Revolutionary Navy's Gadsden flag, a derivative of which, the First Navy Jack, bears the same words and has been flown on all active U.S. naval ships since the September 11 terrorist attacks): Don't Tread On Me. You believe whatever you want, and I'll do the same.

No problem with these people- I even have a close friend who fits the bill. Though there are nut-bags out there, most of them just want to be left alone. 

Update: I agree with SilverFox's review, with one small caveat: Morality has its foundations in religion & religious law. This goes back to the Code of Hammurabi, which served as a model for the 10 Commandments, etc. That said, yes...it is possible for a person to be moral without subscribing to any particular religion or attending church.

Atheists spend alot of their time and resources fighting against something they claim does not exist.

Hardly "defying tradition"; I would imagine the concepts of atheism and agnosticism have been around for as long as religion has.  According to Wikipedia, the term "atheos" (literally, "without god") has been used back in the 5th century BCE, so it's been around for a while.  

As far as agnosticism goes, well, I can't speak for others for why they aren't religious, but as for me, I haven't found strong evidence for any particular belief that currently or previously existed, but I'd be dishonest to reject any possibility of future evidence that may arise.  Life isn't so much about "picking a side" as it is "searching for the truth".

It's an Atheist's right not to beileve just like it's the right of an Agnostic to have questions, and I also have the right to beileve in God the Father, God the Son, and God the Holy Ghost. 

This is a pet peeve of mine. Either you believe in God, or you don't. I apologize to all the genuine 'undecided' people out there, but most people either don't want to look 'uncool' in front of their friends by admitting they believe in God, but are also scared of going to hell so they call themselves 'agnostic', or they don't believe in God at all, but say they are agnostic 'just in case'...
Basically, it is just people not having the balls to admit what they believe...

Being an atheist is part of the great libertarian tradition in America that goes back to Thomas Paine and his Age of Reason.