That's an interesting viewpoint which touches on the pragmatism I try to get across in this article. Indeed, labels can become empty if they're abstract and divorced from practical differences.

Then again, there's the opposite problem of eschewing labels to hide behind vagueness. Maybe someone doesn't want to be identified as an atheist because of the unpopular connotations of that label. Or maybe the person is a victim of self-deception and can't bring herself to admit she's lost her faith.

Sam Harris addressed the point about the consequences of religious beliefs, in The End of Faith. He made the point that our fundamental beliefs tend to affect our behaviour after all, even if only covertly or indirectly.

So I agree that we should be allowed to think what we want. I'm wholeheartedly opposed to censorship and to thought control. But what we believe affects what we do and how we live. So we can't hide forever behind the liberal principle of the freedom of thought.

Do theists really all live as if there were no God? I argue that most of them indeed do so, because they're hypocrites. But are you saying it's impossible to live as a theist? Look at the ascetics and fundamentalists. There's a variety of possible behaviours, and they're not all atheistic.