XPost: alt.atheism, talk.atheism, sci.logic   
   XPost: alt.atheism.holysmoke, alt.atheism.satire, talk.philosophy   
   From: edmond@le-comte-de-monte-cristo.biz   
      
   Cary Kittrell wrote:   
      
   > In article  Bad Wolf   
   >  writes:   
   >> In the great debate about "Is there a name for this argument?" in   
   >> alt.atheism, "A former child star"    
   >> catapaulted the following boulder:   
   >> >My friend wants to know, do you have a name for this supposed   
   >> >"fallacy",   
   >> >"You would not believe the evidence of God's existence even if it was   
   >> >showed to you"   
   >>   
   >> Smells like straw to me.   
   >   
   > One assumes that an all-powerful god would be cabale enough to   
   > come up with a demonstration of its existence which would   
   > be beyond denying.   
   >   
   >   
   > -- cary   
      
   Since deities are human creations of fancy, why bother entertaining the   
   possibility of their existence at all? Do we bother with debating the   
   possible existence of Fairy God-Mothers? Unicorns? Leprechauns? The Brain   
   of George Bush?   
      
   Those so-inclined to believe such fancies have already taken leave of their   
   rationality, so debating with them is rather pointless. They have become   
   Mindless Vessels of Belief.   
      
   --   
   -- Edmond Dantes, CMC   
   And Now for something Completely Different:   
     http://toddler.WebPeekaboo.com   
     http://irrigation.medicalclue.com   
     http://freedom.womensmarts.com   
     http://glass.SelfMadeDream.com   
     http://guest-books.weddingbelljoy.com   
     http://victorian.giftsantiquescollectables.com   
     http://volunteering.MyInfiniteWealth.com   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)