if you give because you are guilted into it, that says something about your giving. it says you give not to solve a problem, but to ease your emotions. this is a recipe for ineffective aide.
thats pretty terrifying.
cool. we are on the same page.
so there is no god still doesn't require proof, it the the logical and scientific null hypothesis that has yet to be overcome by data.
Cockerpunk, you've now moved from asserting that a negative can't be proven to a negative can't be proven directly, or a negative can only be proven if.... Significantly, no one argued such a direct proof.
That's fine. It also leads back to the ostensible basis of your faith, i.e. that its grammitical construction doesn't demand further thought or inquiry. That's a simple burden shifting assertion, not an argument.
There is no God but God.
The earth is not flat.
Zero does not exist.
This sentence is not true.
Each is a negative grammatical construction. Negative grammatical construction doesn't make a rational person believe whatever is stated as a default.