View Single Post
Old 11-07-2012, 22:30   #25
CLM Number 265
Charter Lifetime Member
ArtificialGrape's Avatar
Join Date: May 2007
Location: Colorado Springs
Posts: 6,006
Blog Entries: 1
Originally Posted by Berto View Post
I'm just wondering if this reasoning applies to all things we know *not to exist*
Can you give an example of something that you "know" not to exist? Would you accept the burden of proof of asserting that it does not exist?

Originally Posted by Berto View Post
Personally, I believe in God, but I'm not committed to some denomination or Orthodox, just as I feel certain there is intelligent life elsewhere in the universe. I can't prove either to be truth, but I don't see any proof to the contrary, either.
Obviously lack of evidence of non-existence is not evidence of existence.
Originally Posted by Berto View Post
It seems like the base fundamental to aetheism always comes down to burden of proof for theist as opposed to general acceptance that we don't know one way or the other.
The burden of proof rests on the party making the assertion. Christians assert that God exists, so they have the burden of proof to support that assertion. Very few atheists, that I'm aware of, assert "there is no god", since you cannot prove a negative *that is logically possible*.
Originally Posted by Berto View Post
I don't care what others believe, I'd think it would be the same with aetheist, but there seems to be an evangelical quality to aetheism here.
If your (and I mean that in the general, not specific sense) being a Christian meant nothing more than you wasting your time and money at Church, then I wouldn't particularly care. However, when belief compels people to attempt to legislate their deities morality on the entire population, and to abuse and reject science in favor of religious dogma, and for 1 in 8 high school biology teachers to admit to illegally advancing creationism in the classroom, etc., then it becomes an issue.

ArtificialGrape is offline   Reply With Quote