Out of all of the atheists I have met, not a single one has given a logical and rational case that atheism, by proper definition, is true.
@AtlanticCanuck "Lack" implies a deficiency. I don't "lack" belief in witches--there is nothing that merits belief. @MrOzAtheist @CICarson
-
-
@emlynaddison
@atlanticcanuck@mrozatheist That is only semantics. To deny the proposition, "Witches exist," is to assert, "Witches do not." -
@CICarson Your statement is so clearly WRONG! Do you believe leprechauns exist? @emlynaddison@MrOzAtheist -
@AtlanticCanuck @emlynaddison@mrozatheist If I assert that "leprechauns do not exist," will you not require justification for my assertion? -
@CICarson Yes. If you CLAIM they don’t exist, prove it! @emlynaddison@MrOzAtheist -
@AtlanticCanuck @emlynaddison@mrozatheist My point exactly from the very beginning. -
@CICarson No, the burden of proof is on the claimant, not the disputant.@AtlanticCanuck@MrOzAtheist -
@CICarson @emlynaddison we are agnostic atheists if you want to call us that. But still atheists. - 9 more replies
New conversation -
-
-
@emlynaddison
@MrOzAtheist@CICarson The definition I’m using for “lack” is “don’t have” or “don’t possess”. I don’t have said belief. -
@AtlanticCanuck I know, I just refute the OED's use of the word "lack" (which is itself defined using "deficient").@MrOzAtheist@CICarson -
@emlynaddison OK.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.