Originally Posted by scccdoc
[blah, blah, blah...]
You keep twisting my qualified statements into absolutes so you can tear down the strawman easier. Only theists deal in absolutes.
As for proof that there is no god, we've been over this before. The burden of proof lies with the person making the extraordinary (in this case supernatural) claim. I don't have to support the statement that there is no Santa Clause with proof in order for it to be valid and I don't have to support the statement there is no god for the same reason (even though I have here multiple times). The existence of supernatural deities runs contrary to everything that has ever been observed in this universe. The inductive case against god is overwhelming. I don't have to treat an infinitesimally small chance as a real and viable possibility.
CavDoc: "If you have to pretend that a person with a different opinion has an opinion other than his own in order to score points in an argument, you've forfeited any points that you pretended to have."
CavDoc: "You consider yourself as non-religious, and I consider you a religious zealot."
JBnTX: "Freedom of religion doesn't mean you can worship any God, anyway you see fit or not even worship any God if you so choose. [...] Christianity should be the only religion protected under the constitution, and congress shall make no law restricting its practice."
Last edited by Geko45; 12-19-2012 at 15:09..