On 31 Oct, 20:26, real1 wrote:
On Wed, 31 Oct 2007 06:50:26 -0700, Roger Pearse

wrote:

[snip]

Indeed not. This is why atheists, invariably proselytising
for conformity to the societal values of the time in which they happened
to be born, can't even state their preferred belief, never mind offer
evidence for it.

And what sort of belief would that be?

QED.

It is characteristic of atheists to be evasive about the belief-system
for which they proselytise, while making demands of others. Of course
this may be because they don't know, but I suspect "don't care" and
"don't want to be questioned" is more accurate.

All "atheism" is is a lack of one particular belief. It does not indicate
the presence of ANY belief.

This is a standard excuse offered by atheists, as a reason why they
don't have to explain, justify, or analyse their beliefs. But the
idea that atheists live without a belief system is risible. Ask how
they live! How do they decide whether to lie or tell the truth?
whether to obey the law or not? etc etc. The beliefs of atheists,
analysed by their behaviour over decades, turn out to be conformity to
some subset of societal values, with a learning in the direction of
unthinking convenience. Needless to say no atheist can even
articulate this.

The idea that atheism is merely a hate-creed with no positive content
is of course plausible to some extent; but then, atheists deny that
too.

As I said, the endless refusal of atheists to put their own beliefs up
for discusion

When challenged they try to find reasons why they
don't have to provide evidence!

Since there's nothing there requiring it.

Like so.

What requires evidence is THEISM (belief in a god or gods).

I.e., someone else. It is difficult not to feel contempt for this
attempt to demand of others what they cannot provide themselves.

Include all your evidence below this line ...

And following the ignorance, the evasions, and the hypocrisy, we get
the insolence.

All the best,

Roger Pearse