(April 16, 2014 at 9:44 pm)Rampant.A.I. Wrote:I refer to the multitude of threads claiming to show problems with various doctrines, claiming that believers are delusional etc. For example...(April 16, 2014 at 9:25 pm)ChadWooters Wrote: The whole "atheism is simply a lack of belief" card turns out to be a lie the minute atheists start to defend their lack of belief by giving reasons for it. Once you start making claims for or against an idea then you have stopped being agnostic (that strangely forgotten word) and have started to advocate a position. It's a dishonest bait-and-switch tactic to avoid the burden of proof.
Can you demonstrate proving a negative? Do making the claims "unicorns, leprechauns and elves don't exist" require extensive evidence, or is rejecting their existence "burden reversal" as well?
Believer: I believe in God.
Atheist: You're wrong.
Believer: Why am I wrong?
In this case the burden of proof is actually on the atheist. That's very different from the following...
Believer: I believe in God.
Atheist: Why?
The problem is that some of you flip flop between the two pretending not to know the difference.
