Dad links son's suicide to 'The God Delusion'

[Edwardo Piet]

LMFAO this is hilarious. Dawkins is not an 'atheistic fearless leader' he's a promoter of science and reason who's also a militant atheist. He's been called one of the most if not the most prominent atheist.
Anyway. Saying "all religions are delusional" does not imply that "all atheists are normal". Thats stupid. Because of course you get atheist criminals and lunatics too for example. You get mad, bad and sad atheists too.
The point is that a supernatural belief in a God or gods is delusional. And atheists by definition do not share this (or these) delusion(s).
And on the subject of intelligence for example, Dawkins does NOT say "All atheists are more intelligent than theists". He simply wrote about (in TGD) a huge survey over the span of several years that took place. And the results showed that on average atheists have higher IQs.
Futhermore,
These two:

I claim God exists, you claim he doesn't. There is zero scientfic studies that prove God is a delusion of the mind. Atheists always demand evidence before they can believe in something. So, what's the difference with this arguement compared to many others? Atheists have no evidence that "God is imaginary," so, if there is zero evidence of this statement, then how can atheists put so much faith into something that cannot be explained by any mortal man?

So, in reality, who is delusional? I would think if God can be scientifically disproven, then I would believe religious people may suffer from schitzophrenia. But since the God idea cannot be deflated in any manner.. I don't see the reason for insulting religious folk by calling them delusional.

VS this:
How many times have I told you? And I am yet to hear a satisfactory answer. All I've got is mere pathetic contradiction. "No it isn't on me, the burden on proof is on you. You have to disprove God". What kind of an argument is that? As I have said God doesn't need to be disproved! Why? (I give a reason unlike you) Because there's no evidence of or even structure to "God", TO be disproved in the first place. The burden of proof is on the believer. Why can't God be deflated? because he's already deflated. And he always has been. The whole thing IS - and always has been - just an idea with no evidence to support it. God's already deflated. Because there's nothing to deflate. There's Zero evidence of "God" to be deflated in the first place. He's already deflated.

And if you claim the burden of proof is on either both of us or neither of us. This is of course incorrect. As I have said. Its on the believer.