13 arguments atheists shouldn't use

[Dystopia]

I notice the same recurring theme. "The argument is not evidence that god does not exist"

True enough, but the argument is still evidence of how ignorant theists are. Many of the above arguments I do not use in favor of proving god does not exist, for no argument is truly needed in such a case.. I use the arguments to show how dumb the theist is.

It depends - Being smarter or more educated is not proof that you are better or more likely to be correct, more scientists being atheists is not proof that atheism is right, etc - I'm saying that if we want to prove god doesn't exist or that god is less likely to exist those arguments are not correct. If we are the ones saying "atheists are right because of X reasons" we should come up with good reasons (and there are a lot) If you just want to insult theists, then it's fine to call them delusional or dumb, etc, it's actually kinda fun. My point is that atheists sometimes use those arguments to discredit theists, but it's not valid OR necessary - Theism can be dismissed with rational argument

I don't have to prove that god ( any god) doesn't exist. It is up to the shitheads to prove that their beliefs are valid.

No, but if you make the claim that "atheism is more rational" or that "god most likely doesn't exist" the burden of proof shifts to you - We atheists do that all the time and when that happens it's up to us to tell theists why atheists are right - And don't even dare saying it's not necessary - It's extremely easy to name 10 reasons why atheists are right and theists are not.

There isn't anything in that list that stands out that I would disagree with. I especially advise atheists to never go with the we are smarter angle. Aside from not always being true it just tends to piss people off. Then they'll close up to you and block out any of your arguments. It's kind of the same way we react when theists make the claim that they are moral than us.

Yeah I agree - My reasoning is that it's a good way to piss off theists, but it's not useful to prove one's point, and I don't think we should create the idea that intelligent people are objectively superior - I don't want to go down that path (we could as well bring races, for example, and say asian score higher on IQ tests and therefore asians are right)