XPost: sac.politics, can.politics, alt.atheism   
   XPost: alt.politics.homosexuality   
      
   On Sun, 19 Apr 2015 16:17:35 +1000, felix_unger  wrote:   
   .   
   >On 18-April-2015 6:54 AM, mur wrote:   
   >> On Tue, 7 Apr 2015 18:27:00 -0400, "M.I.Wakefield"  wrote:   
   >> ..   
   >>> "David Johnston"  wrote in message news:mg1it3$3fd$4@dont-email.me...   
   >>>   
   >>>> On 4/7/2015 3:04 PM, mur wrote:   
   >>>>>       It means what I pointed out for you. Atheists demand evidence,   
   >>>> I have not demanded any.   
   >>> Atheists demand evidence before they will change their minds: None has been   
   >>> offered.   
   >>      You're lying,   
   >   
   >she certainly is.   
      
       One thing I still can't figure out is how these people feel it's somehow   
   better to tell an extremely stupidly blatant lie we all know is a lie like   
   that,   
   than to not tell it. Could they actually believe it could somehow become true   
   if   
   they repeat it often enough?   
      
   >>   so there's that. You don't happen to like the evidence that   
   >> has been offered, but for some reason you're ashamed to admit that. The   
   question   
   >> of why you're ashamed of it comes immediately to mind, but you can't afford   
   to   
   >> try to answer even IF you think you have some clue what the answer is. So   
   >> there's all of that.   
   >>   
   >>      Moving on with consideration of the position you're in: You don't like   
   the   
   >> evidence you've been offered meaning you must think there "should be" more   
   if   
   >> God does exist. Yet you have no idea WHAT you think it should be, WHERE you   
   >> think it should be, WHY you think God should provide it, or WHEN you think   
   he   
   >> should provide it or should have provided it. All that means you have no   
   reason   
   >> to think whatever evidence you're demanding should be available to people to   
   >> begin with, so it's idiotic of you to demand it at all.   
   >>   
   >>      Moving on...not only is all of the above idiotic but it's even worse   
   than   
   >> all that. If God does exist and wants things to be as they are, it's   
   idiotic to   
   >> insist he should provide the sort of "evidence" you demand since it would   
   change   
   >> things a LOT and things would no longer be as they are. Maybe at some   
   points in   
   >> the past, and some points in the future, it was and will be of value to God   
   to   
   >> provide mankind in general with what you demand. But apparently at this   
   point in   
   >> time it's not, nor is it of value to him to provide you personally with it   
   >> either.   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)