On Thursday, November 24, 2016 at 12:37:47 PM UTC-5, Kurt V. Ullman wrote:
On 11/24/16 12:11 PM, Sterling Archer wrote:
Kurt V. Ullman has brought this to us :


You assert your invisible friends exist and use them as the basis for
influencing public policy. I simply ask for empirical evidence of the
existence of your invisible friends, there is nothing unreasonable about
my request.

The original fallacy is to assume things not in evidence.

And only one poster here is doing that. End of story.



I merely
commented that your belief was based in faith as much as any Christians
since you couldn't prove yours any more than they could prove theirs. MY
feelings either way was not made.


He has nothing to prove. It's like saying someone believes that little
green men live on Mars and someone else says I won't believe that until
you show evidence of it, prove it. Those "beliefs" are to be equated?



Without empirical evidence, your assertions are little more than hearsay
at best, or delusions, mental illness and bold faced lies at worst.
And thus we get further evidence of the intolerance that is equal to
fundamentalists of any faith.

Nonsense. No one is saying they can't believe what they want to believe.
Only that they should not expect us to believe it without proof and that
our laws should not be based on their unproven religious beliefs.