Are all atheists this ill-informed about religion?

[Edwardo Piet]

Are all atheists ill-informed about religion?

No.

[Delicate]

Where does one go for actually informed atheistic critiques of religion?

You're asking the wrong questions, Delicate.  Perhaps, instead of looking for justifications for atheism, you need to look for justifications for religion.  See, that's very important here because I'm not so much a hard-line atheist as much as I simply haven't found any religion or deity that continues to sound believable after some basic questioning.

So, if you'd like to ask some specific questions, I'd be happy to answer them.  And if you'd like to explain your beliefs, I'd be happy to ask some questions about them.

I have looked at justifications for religion and found them credible. Many if not most of the critiques leveled against them from internet atheists look terrible on closer scrutiny and this can be demonstrated, time and time again. The really good, penetrating critiques of theistic arguments are very few and very far between.

[Minimalist]

Usually the least educated. Not because of their own fault, but because of an abysmal public school system.

Logical except that the public school system is not allowed to teach religion.  Apparently someone else is falling down on the job.

[Delicate]

That may be all you need to defend, but you're certainly not doing a good job of defending it.

You have not presented any thing I need to refute. I have yet had to defend my assertion that it does not live up to the criteria.

You haven't substantiated the claim or provide any specifics, which is needed for a successful defense. Have people attempted to provide you demonstrable evidence in the past and you've found problems with their demonstrations? What did they try to demonstrate and how did it fail? This is needed for a successful defense of your claim as well.

Seriously, how dense are you?

What do you think I have not defended? You have yet to provide anything that you believe constitutes demonstrable evidence, reasoned argument and valid/sound logic for the god you are claiming exists. As soon as you do, I will defend my assertion that it does not live up to the criteria I have been mentioning. 

Yes. Everything that I have heard from theists does not pass the criteria. 

The list of the arguments theists have used is too long to mention here. 

In addition, further questions arise from your request for me to present my evidence- before you have even seen my evidence, how can you claim to substantiate your assertion that it doesn't meet your criteria? You haven't even seen the evidence yet! Unless you have a faith-based commitment to atheism that lets you know of its failure before seeing it...

I can make that assertion because I have heard and debated every argument from theists. 

Unless you have some new, never before thought of argument or evidence, I am 100% confident that your arguments are just as flawed as everything presented for 1000's of years. 

So you have failed to substantiate your claim, and your atheism seems faith-based. Maybe you can take care of that when you wake up tomorrow.

How do you know I can't substantiate my claim?

How is basing my disbelief on the existence of a god on the lack of evidence, reasoned argument, and valid/sound logic a faith based position?

Is your disbelief in bigfoot, alien abductions, Loch Ness monster, crystal healing, etc, etc a faith based position?

And I haven't even gotten to your unsubstantiated assertion that I don't seem to grasp basic logic, skepticism, etc. What's the evidence for that?

Almost every post of yours on this forum. 

Your case looks very weak, as it would fail to convince even to a dispassionate skeptic.

How do you know how weak my case is? You haven't presented an argument for the existence of your god yet for me to respond to.

You continue to fail to see where the burden of proof lies. Not surprised, but it is frustrating. 

You complain the list is too long.

So produce the most compelling theistic example, Moon. Or produce your favorite refutation. Or produce the last one you refuted. Or produce the argument you think is easiest to refute.

Really, any concrete example will do.

Something that substantiates your claim, even in part. 

Give me something, Moon. Don't make me believe you on faith, you gaudy-suit wearing atheist televangelist.

[Athene]

Is a baptism considered legitimate if it's performed on an infant?

Yes, but the catholics have a second ritual, 'confirmation', at the "age of reason" where they acknowledge their commitment to catholicism.

I'm aware of that. 

This was a question I presented to the OP in response to a claim made in one of his/her related threads. The question was meant to serve as an example of a denominational difference that could be considered more than a trivial or insignificant matter. It hadn't been addressed in the other thread.

[Minimalist]

Yes, but the catholics have a second ritual, 'confirmation', at the "age of reason"

Is that the one where the pervert priests make their selections?

[Homeless Nutter]

Yes, but the catholics have a second ritual, 'confirmation', at the "age of reason"

Is that the one where the pervert priests make their selections?

No. You're thinking of the First Comunion, which is at around age 8. Confirmation is at 14, so that's when the priests playfully slap the kids' a**es for the last time, wink and remind them to keep their b*tch-ass mouths shut for at least another 34 years, as per Crimen sollicitationis.

[Pat Mustard]

How does the theist "know" anything?

God witness himself as the only true God, and knows there doesn't exist any realm in which another god exists. This knowledge of himself, to a lesser degree, is endowed upon humans. The more "life" we have, the more faith we have in this belief, because it's seen through vision of his light.

So, basically, as long as humans believe bullshit, god exists. But then again, which form of bullshit?

[Anomalocaris]

Yes, but the catholics have a second ritual, 'confirmation', at the "age of reason"

Is that the one where the pervert priests make their selections?

If only priests would wait that long.

[abaris]

Logical except that the public school system is not allowed to teach religion.  Apparently someone else is falling down on the job.

Yes, but they are also the ones, the biblia pauperum has been created for.The less educated you are, the easier you fall for what a seemingly educated person tells you to be true.