13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 : All worldviews are merely paradigms, narratives having no more inherent value than any other narrative. (Postmodernist nonsense)

13th Dec 2007 : A universe that follows "laws" implies a "law giver" and our ability to comprehend those laws is evidence of the divine purpose of the Universe. Or alternatively: A rational universe implies a creator.

13th Dec 2007 :

13th Dec 2007 : Why do atheists care about what others believe when it doesn't affect atheists? Or alternatively: Why do atheists care about something they claim not to believe in?

13th Dec 2007 :

28th Oct 2007 : Rhetorical questions like this are used as an attempt to poke holes in the evolutionary explanation of morality, in the same way creationists or ID-ists look for "irreducible complexity" in biology.

25th Oct 2007 : If you don't believe in God, you must not believe in anything.

25th Oct 2007 : The appeal that religion is generally moderate, and that it is only the extremists who are the problem.

25th Oct 2007 : "Religion created science" or "Without religion we wouldn't have science" or something like that.

25th Oct 2007 : "The US is (or was founded as) a Christian Nation." or a related point: "The idea of Church/State separation comes from Christianity"

25th Oct 2007 : This topic was covered in the Shermer vs D'Souza debate "Is Christianity Good For the World?".

24th Oct 2007 : Atheism is self-refuting because it asserts that everything in the universe, including the atheist's own reasoning, came about as a result of non-rational forces. If that is indeed the case, every argument employed by the atheist is, according to his own assertions, incoherent and meaningless. Only the theist is able to claim coherence and true logic in his arguments because those arguments are founded on the notion of an all-knowing being.

24th Oct 2007 : Religionists like caricature non-believers as being unhappy, depressed, loveless, indifferent, etc. If you don't believe in God, then you must hate music, art, poetry, etc. As Hitchens has said, "distinguish the numinous from the supernatural."

24th Oct 2007 : Science can't tell us why we're here or what is the meaning of our lives.

24th Oct 2007 : It is common for the religious to ask you to prove that you love someone, as if this is an excuse for there being no evidence for God.

24th Oct 2007 : The Argument From Design can take many forms. Why is there something rather than nothing? What about the fine-tuning of the fundamental constants of the universe (The "Goldie Locks" proposition)? First Cause?

24th Oct 2007 : Pascal's Wager can still show up in debates, be ready for it.

24th Oct 2007 : One emerging favourite of the theists is to argue that science points towards theism on the basis that a Universe that follows "laws" implies a "law giver", and our ability to comprehend those laws is further evidence of the divine purpose of the Universe.

24th Oct 2007 : Weaknesses in evolution (gaps in fossil record, formation of the eye, bacteria with one protein taken out doesn't work, etc).

24th Oct 2007 : Another common method of trying to use religion against the non-religious.

24th Oct 2007 : This is an argument meant to level the playing field between science and religion.

24th Oct 2007 : This is a common one, used as an evasive maneuver.

24th Oct 2007 : Sometimes people claim that Atheism is its own religion, and that it is possible to be a "Fundementalist Atheist."

24th Oct 2007 : Use the comment space below the article to present your rebuttal. Let's try and be clear and concise, as if this were to be used in a debate.

24th Oct 2007 : A common debate point in religious debates is morality. We often meet the argument that you can't be moral without God.

24th Oct 2007 : We've all heard this one. I'd even go so far as to say most of us have probably answered this one.