At some point, most people and human gatherings that don't pledge to mystery have a tendency to participate in some shape or another of proselytism. 
From Open Source aficionados to adepts of running, it's typical for individuals to attempt to persuade others regarding what they see is the unrivaled side of their feelings, feelings, states of mind or information. What's more, the vast majority of them do it since they are really persuaded that others will passage better on the off chance that they simply observe their better side of things. Consequently, I won't address this perspective, as both religious individuals and nonbelievers will normally administer their sentiments to a changing level of request.
What the inquiry appears to infer is that there is a consider push by agnostics, that always weights religious individuals, for all intents and purposes to the point of provocation. Regardless of whether such objective is substantial or not, there is obviously no such thing as a general agnostic pattern to drive their perspectives on religious individuals, not to mention some type of "nonbeliever minister". Note that a few religions do have ministers and evangelists, which could absolutely drive the inquiry «Why won't the religious ones simply leave the agnostics/individuals of different religions alone?», however that is past the point here; it gets the job done to state that proselytism is a segment of numerous religions .
There is, be that as it may, a type of skepticism, as of late advanced by any semblance of Richard Dawkins, Christopher Hitchens, Daniel Dennett, and so forth., which has a tendency to be blunt and openly reproachful of religion – the Militant Atheism. Now, in any case, one ought to characterize what "to take off alone" means. In Dawkins' words, the objective of aggressor skepticism is to straightforwardly express its position and to battle the invasion of the congregation into governmental issues and science. Be that as it may, this is, basically, a political feeling, shared by all secularists, reverberating perspectives held as of now in old Greece by the Epicurians. By drive majeure, agnostics have considerably more grounded motivations to be secularists. It is just common that they respond to religious endeavors to impact government or different parts of open life, similarly as a moderate will endeavor to respond to assess increments or a communist to the decrease of specialists' rights.
Numerous agnostics, specifically aggressor skeptics, additionally trust that religions are negative to society: they force world perspectives with no logical establishing (e.g. supernatural occurrences), they can make physical and mental mischief people and networks (e.g abuse of gay people), and they teach individuals from youthful age. In this manner, other than their desire to advance logical based thinking, they consider it to be a piece of their obligation to prevent these things from happening.
"Cheers"
