Comments by "Yesica1993" (@Yesica1993) on "Milo vs Atheism (Pt. 4) | Milo Yiannopoulos | POLITICS | Rubin Report" video.
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
Caradog V
"The default position is to be undecided, and unless it is made evident that he is guilty, we stay undecided, and stick with Not Guilty. "
But you are not "undecided". If you were undecided, you would identify as an agnostic. An agnostic is someone who is yet "in between" on the question of whether God exists. That is not the position you hold. The position you hold is that God does not exist.
"I've put God on trial, and found him Not Guilty of existing."
Exactly. Your point of view is that God does not exist. That's why you are an atheist, not an agnostic.
(I'd love to see that trial and what evidence you found, examined, rejected, and why. But that's another discussion.)
But this is why you refuse to answer the question I've put to you at least twice that I've seen. Claiming you have no belief about God makes it easy for you to get out of presenting any reasons why you choose to have no belief in God. It's a game. And I won't play it with you.
I will ask it the final time. I am going to make a statement: God exists. Do you agree or disagree with this statement?
There are only three possible answers that I can see here: 1) Agree, 2) Disagree, 3) Uncertain
If you agree, you are a deist or theist of some stripe. You hold to the view that some sort of God exists.
If you disagree, you are an atheist. You hold to the view that God / gods do not exist.
If you are uncertain, you are an agnostic. You hold to the view that you are uncertain on whether God/gods exist.
It seems pretty straightforward to me.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1