Originally Posted by dirk667
why so? in court, the prosicutor has to provide the evidence also. so please, present.
Court is a perfect example. The prosecutor is the one making the claim that the defendant is guilty, therefore it is his duty to provide proof of that claim. The defendant assumes the default 'innocent' label unless sufficient evidence is presented to prove otherwise.
There is no evidence to support the belief in God, hence the whole blind faith thing. Therefore there is no reason to logically believe any claim presented by someone that God does exist unless they can supply convincing proof. Which they cannot.
If someone said "Hey, I found a species of turtle that can fly and shoot lazers from it's shell," you probably wouldn't go "Oh, cool. I believe you until someone can prove those turtles don't exist." Right? You'd probably want some proof, assuming you're not a gullible idiot. Same exact line of reasoning applies here. If people make a claim, it's their job to supply proof. it's not the job of the people who justifiably doubt the claim to prove them wrong.