An argument for religion would necessarily imply that you're trying to convince a non-believer. If I disbelieve in the supernatural, on the basis that there appears to be a complete absence of anything supernatural in the universe as far as we've been able to observe it, an argument like that is meaningless. In fact, it is not even really an argument. It's a statement you assume to be true and expect me to accept, knowing I can't confirm a negative. You have to overcome the hurdle of convincing me that anything supernatural exists before you could ever hope to convince me that a particular flavor of supernatural being exists. I don't believe in God, but I also think ghosts and poltergeists are bullshit.
Deism really doesn't need a defense, anyway. It isn't anything more than a blind guess and the existence of the deist's god is irrelevant to humanity.
Deism really doesn't need a defense, anyway. It isn't anything more than a blind guess and the existence of the deist's god is irrelevant to humanity.
