(Religious) What would i be labeled?

Apatheism

An apatheist is someone who is not interested in accepting or rejecting any claims that gods do exist or do not exist. The existence of a god or gods is not rejected, but may be designated irrelevant.

You're an Agnostic.

Agnosticism is the view or belief that the existence of God, the divine, or the supernatural is either unknowable in principle or unknown in fact.

Agnostic atheist. That's a pretty standard position for atheists. It means you don't believe in gods but you're not claiming that they don't exist. Proving that something doesn't exist is logically impossible so there's no point even bothering to try. So we're willing to believe in gods, if someone presents convincing evidence for their existence. Until then we don't.

Agnostic.

Apatheism: (apathy+theism) It's unimportant if god exist or not, you just don't care.

Practical Atheism: Just live your life not regarding any god.

The difference between those two is, a theist can be a practical atheist but not an apatheist.

Agnostic atheist.

but I always thought that was used to describe people who don’t think he exists.

Agnostic atheists and gnostic atheists are both atheists. The only people who say "atheists by definition claim there is no god" are theists, so that atheism seems unreasonable.

I'd call you an atheist, but specify "agnostic atheist" to anyone who doesn't understand the nuances of the terms.

OP is clearly God and just trolling us. Nice try God, we're on to you

That is what I call Atheist. You don't care if one exists or not.
Atheist like us generally get thrown in with anti-theists (people who refuse an existence of gods) and are just as bad as a fundamentalist trying to prove they are right about a god existing or not.

Ignosticism or igtheism is the idea that the question of the existence of God is meaningless because the word "God" has no coherent and unambiguous definition.

Also see theological noncognitivism.

Say you have a jar full of jellybeans. We know that the number of whole jellybeans in the jar must be either even or odd.

If someone asks you if you believe the number of jellybeans in the jar is even, you can and should say "no" if you haven't counted them or otherwise gathered any evidence to support that conclusion. To believe something is to say you feel it is more likely true than false, and you can't say that about the given proposition.

Importantly, this does not mean you do believe the number of jellybeans is odd. The fact that one of those two things must be true does not mean you have to pick one to believe and one to disbelieve. It is perfectly rational to reserve belief either way until you have evidence one way or the other. You do not believe it's even, nor do you believe it's odd.

So, if we define "atheist" as "someone who does not believe in any gods", I think you meet the definition of atheist. Just like the person in the above example does not believe the jellybeans are even & also does not believe they are odd, you don't need to believe "there are no gods anywhere" to not believe "there is at least one god".

A human

I'd say YoFrodo's answer of apatheism is possibly the closest you're going to get, but speaking in general terms of not believing or caring one way or the other, you'd be agnostic, not an atheist. Atheism is the belief that there are no gods and out right rejection in the belief of any gods. Those saying you're atheist don't know what one is.

TL;DR, it sounds like agnostic.

I've seen people differentiate between "agnostic atheist" and "gnostic atheist" but I am not sure if those are commonly used terms or just the result of a viral meme about it.

• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Negative_and_positive_atheism
• https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Implicit_and_explicit_atheism

Negative atheism, also called weak atheism and soft atheism, is any type of atheism where a person does not believe in the existence of any deities but does not necessarily explicitly assert that there are none. Positive atheism, also called strong atheism and hard atheism, is the form of atheism that additionally asserts that no deities exist.

• Implicit "negative" / "weak" / "soft" atheists who lack a belief in God without explicitly denying the concept, includes very young children, those who are unacquainted with the concept or are truly undecided.
• Explicit "negative" / "weak" / "soft" atheists who do not believe that God exists necessarily.
• Explicit "positive" / "strong" / "hard" atheists who firmly believe that God doesn't exist.

When you say

The thing is, I just plain don’t care if God exists or not. They could, or they couldn’t, it really has no bearing on how I live my life. For that reason along I think I go in the atheist camp, but I always thought that was used to describe people who don’t think he exists.

To me that sounds like negative Atheism. You don't assert there is a divine being. Whether or not that is implicit or explicit is sort of hard to judge based on these statements.

For example, what you are saying is more about how you would react to a god, not necessarily how you'd believe in one. One might argue you're on the fence about Deism. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deism Because the type of god they believe in is one that is impersonal and does not intervene in their creation. In a sense that's not really contradictory with your statement.

All in all, asserting that the existence of a god would have no effect on how you live your life doesn't really have to do with your potential beliefs in god. For example, someone could believe in the Christian god exclusively but specifically not follow any doctrines they set forth. Perhaps as a means of rebellion or perhaps apathy.

Agnostic fits well. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agnosticism You say God could exist or not. If you believe it's impossible to prove them that makes you an atheist.

https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/atheism-agnosticism/?ref=whcolony.com#DefiAgno

The terms “agnostic” and “agnosticism” were famously coined in the late nineteenth century by the English biologist, T.H. Huxley. He said that he originally

invented the word “Agnostic” to denote people who, like [himself], confess themselves to be hopelessly ignorant concerning a variety of matters [including of course the matter of God’s existence], about which metaphysicians and theologians, both orthodox and heterodox, dogmatise with the utmost confidence. (1884)

I always considered atheist to mean "don't believe at all" ans agnostic as "willing to believe, but won't live any differently"

Not the answer to your question, but I find it important to point out, that atheist and non theist are not necessarily the same.

A non theist isn't necessarily a non believer who rejects all religion like the general understanding of an atheist.

The Dalai Lama for example calls himself an non theist and so do I as a Buddhist. Buddhism is a believe system, a religion, that does not believe that there is a god or gods. Some subdivisions of buddhism believe in divine beings you can turn to and pray to, but they all used to be ordinary humans, same as the Buddha, who obtained enlightenment and transcended into a higher form of being.

I call myself 'functionally atheist'. I'm philosophically agnostic in that I hold no strong opinion on the existence of a god/gods as that is fundamentally unknowable but for all practical purposes I act as though there is no god.

I must be like almost the opposite. I was obsessed with religion and philosophy although now im pretty athiest. So I kinda don't care but for me its more that I looked into more than enough and made up my mind.

If you want to start on a philosophical question, try to define the word "exists". Write down a bunch of definitions, whichever are your favorite, and then see if the expression "God exists." has meaning.

Probably could be called agnostic or maybe deist. I'm not super familiar with either but that might be what you're looking for

You are correct. Atheism is the belief (ironically) that there is no divinity.

I think what you describe (not really caring and leaning towards there not being divinity) would be called atheist-agnostic.

Someone who does think there is divinity but doesnt really care would be a deist-agnostic.

These are more complex concepts than I'm painting them to be, but if you Google them you can see if they fit the way you see yourself.

Who cares? Why is everyone so concerned about labels? Just be your your own unique self and stop trying to fall into a category.

Labels limit us. It's very good to have your own views, your own opinions, independent of groups.

I used to try to fit labels, I was once a Catholic, then I was once an atheist, then I was once an agnostic, then I was once almost an Protestant, then I was once a Luciferian. Nowadays I stopped trying to fit out-of-the-shelf groups/labels and I have my own personal belief system, worshipping Dark Mother Goddess Lilith/Kali/Nuit. There's no "Lilitheism" and even if it was a thing, I wouldn't fit as I have syncretic views and I also consider Dark Mother Goddess as being Devi Kali as well (from Hinduism, although I'm not Hindu), and Nuit as well (from Thelema, although I'm not exactly Thelemite). I could fit the label "syncretic", or "demonolatry", but my views are too multifaceted to fit them.

So, enjoy the belief you have, it's unique.