Would you vote for an Atheist President?

[timmgirvan]

Originally Posted by hi_im_god

two very fine, well thought out posts.

i'll challenge you on one aspect which is the idea that lack of proof means that evidence for both sides is equal. i'd argue that an extraordinary proposition requires extraordinary proof and the lack of such evidence supports the idea that it isn't true.

if we're discussing bigfoot, does the fact that doubter's can't "prove" it doesn't exist to the satisfaction of believers mean both sides of the argument have equal standing? or are we allowed to consider that a breeding population of large land mammals would leave behind some irrefutable evidence (skeleton's, droppings, etc.) and the lack thereof supports the idea the idea that bigfoot is bunk?

i know a supernatural entity might not leave behind such traces. but why does the lack of "proof" lead to the conclusion that both sides could be right? there's a higher burden on those making the truly extraordinary claim to prove their case.

i don't begrudge anyone their beliefs. i know a lot of great thoughtful, kindhearted, christians. you seem like one of those. but i don't characterize my thoughts on god as "faith" (as a later poster suggested) anymore than i would my thoughts on gravity. both are unseen forces. only one has observable proof.

...missing the forest for the trees! That was a rhetorical statement