Believers presume the existence of god. Atheists do not make that assumption. It is an unproven claim, a baseless supposition, an unrealistic perception of reality. Those reasons are all logical, reasonable and most importantly, substantiated with a massive amount of evidence.
The majority of theists will agree that there’s no evidence for their beliefs. They consider that to be a reenforcement of their belief and call it “faith”. Others of us have a standard of evidence that religion cannot meet. It fails several philosophical tests.
Denying god, hating god, loving god, knowing god; all presume that god exists, and usually the god of Abraham. Love him or hate him, god exists; that’s the assumption made by theists.
Atheists see no reason to make that assumption. It presumes a reality that has not yet been established as existing. It’s an assumption that skips over the fact that not everyone agrees with that interpretation of reality. First convince me your god exists, then we can talk about what I think about that.
I get email from Nigerians who promise me that I can become a millionaire if I’ll just share my bank account info with them. I delete them all without opening. Why? Because I know they’re bogus, attempts to convince me of a false reality. How do I know that? A hundred different ways. I’ve read about them, I’ve read them and it’s obvious to all but the most new of the newbies that they are scams. Plain and simple, they’re scams. And you know, I bet most of the theists reading this would agree.
So why should religion be considered in a different light? What exempts religion from skepticism, from doubt, from an honest request for substantiation? Why should religion be immune from dismissal?
In my life, religion has been dismissed as a scam, an attempt to compromise my ability to think for myself. And thinking for myself saved me from falling for those phoney emails. That was a good thing.
