There are several misconceptions floating around here. I'm inclined to undo them.
Agnosticism is a concept that takes the stance, "I don't know". It does not have to be of a religious context. There is no way to know something with all positivity. Therefore, we are all agnostics, whether it be of a theistic issue or otherwise. Contrary to popular belief, agnosticism does not lie in the middle of the Atheism-------------Theism spectrum. In fact, it is something else entirely.
Agnosticism is not (or at least shouldn't) be a stance in which one cannot decide.
On the other hand, Atheism declares the lack of belief in deities. There is no need to say that "modern atheism" is shallow, because atheism is merely a concept. I believe what the OP was implying was that modern atheists are shallow. However, that would be a bold statement and I can see why he would evade it.
If a man were to ask me "Is there a god?"
and I answered, "I believe there is a god", I would not be answering his question.
Likewise, if a man were to ask me "Do you believe there is a god?"
and I responded "There is a god!", I still wouldn't be answering his question.
You must either be an Agnostic Atheist or an Agnostic Theist. This was probably what reason was trying to illustrate.
Furthermore, it is inherently flawed to say that atheists were, at any time, "God hating" because one would have to believe in a god in order to hate him. I speculate that the OP was implying that past atheists were more passionate about their stance, while modern atheists take a colder, scientific approach.
Some of what I said has already been covered, but after reading 17 pages, I felt that I should reiterate it.