What pissed you off the most when debating against theism?

[strawberryBacteria]

To me, It's whenever they take my rhetorical question seriously as if I'm stupid enough to ask those kinda questions in a non-rhetorical way.

[TheRocketSurgeon]

To me, It's whenever they take my rhetorical question seriously as if I'm stupid enough to ask those kinda questions in a non-rhetorical way.

Yes, I think that's the one that gets me most, "Well if you don't believe in God then why do you keep talking about what God is like?"

Close behind it is when they tell me what atheists believe-- which would be fine, if they were even close to accurate...

...but they never are.

[downbeatplumb]

"well what if" with this simple start you can posit any shit you like, apparently without the need to back it up with anything resembling evidence.

[robvalue]

People being unable or unwilling to understand that simply stating something doesn't make it true.

[downbeatplumb]

People being unable or unwilling to understand that simply stating something doesn't make it true.

And that "opinion" is not the same as "fact".

[robvalue]

Also, there seems to be this idea that what is true about religion is dependent on what is believed about it.

"I don't believe Hell is like that."

[Bob Kelso]

The pigeon shitting all over the board.

[brewer]

Being told I'm a poor deluded soul that just can't understand but they'll pray for me.

[Crossless2.0]

I hate that, while they all use the same arguments culled from the same handful of sources, they somehow have never seen the usual objections to their arguments or pretend not to have seen them. Thus, no sooner does one leave (no doubt completely satisfied that he/she has adequately dealt with the atheists' arguments) than another pops up, making precisely the same points. And round and round we go.

It would be nice if they could at least have a source they all go to where they can see, without caricature or straw men, what their opponents are actually saying so we don't have to play this infernal game of Whack A Theist every time someone decides they have a full quiver of apologetic arrows to launch.

[robvalue]

Yeah, the thing is they are straw manning themselves. They don't believe because of the dullard arguments they present. So it doesn't matter in the slightest when they get cut down, or what they get cut down by. They are just shields against revealing why they actually believe, which is rarely discussed.

When I have the energy, I want to add refutations to the common theistic arguments to my website so I can just point them out each time they come up on the apologist-go-round.