"Sorry, the file you have requested cannot be found on any of our servers at the address specified."

could you please give us another link or at least the title of the article? I'll look it up :)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atheism 
Atheism is, in a broad sense, the rejection of belief in the existence of deities.^[1][2] In a narrower sense, atheism is specifically the position that there are no deities.^[3][4][5] Most inclusively, atheism is simply the absence of belief that any deities exist.^[4][5][6][7] Atheism is contrasted with theism,^[8][9] which in its most general form is the belief that at least one deity exists.

There is no definitive proof that their is a god, no physical or tangible evidence. Yet Religion will argue that there is no proof there isn't either. The only hint of physical proof for christianity would be the Bible. But why is this seen as truth? Because it is the word of god. But how do you know its the actual word of God? Because the Bible tells me so................. :/

Atheists simply are saying show me the proof? And seeing as you cannot your conclusions are faulty. I always found one very big falacy in the whole one god religions. That would be their belief that it is impossible for the universe as we know it to be complete happenstance, a series of coincedences, an accident if you will. Ok, well if everything must come from a source of sorts, which in this case is an omnipitant beeing, where did God come from? Who created him? By their logic alone it is impossible for him to just..."BE" and it must be devine calculations at work. So why do we believe in God as apposed to God's God? I mean, we dont worship our parents do we? We respect them but we are suppose to look past them to the greater hiarchy of things. So why stop there when you can worship God's God's God. And the paradox never ends. 

How about we just stick to what we know,studied,learned for the past 2000 years. Using reasonable logic dictated by well known facts. Hypothesizing a possible answer with truth and not just filling in blanks because we don't want to have to think.

I love how Doctor Who/Torchwood approach this subject because they tap into the truth behind the lies. In their world, Aliens are finally realized to be real. In that instant, massive suicide breaks. When asked they say it is because many cannot cope with the scariness of the unknown. The fact that we are not the center of the universe and we learn just how small and insignificant we are as an individual. There entire sense of being implodes upon itself, religion, their job, their families, it all begins to feel mighty trivial. Which just goes to show many would rather live in blissful ignorance than face cold and very dark reality. I can understand it a little, I get this sinking feeling when I watch documentaries of how vast and limitless space is.

I honestly would like to see somebody honestly defending the father's actions, purely for the fact that their stance will be shot to pieces. Yes it's very easy to take the middle ground, but if our society was based that way, there would be no rule of law, no judgement and no consequences to actions. There needs to be logical actions and motives behind both sides.

The insults directed at the father were based on the outcome of his actions. Nobody is forcing him to keep contact with his son, but to many, the very idea that disownment of your own flesh and blood is a reasnable choice for ANY situation AT ALL is enough to put that parent's ability as a parent into question. This is why you see a lot of "bad father" insults. If you disagree, then I'm willing to listen to why you believe disownment of family would EVER be classed as a sensible decision.

Also, keep in mind that the son is a victim here. How would you feel if your parents, the ones who are supposed to love you unconditionally, suddenly take that away? Yes, it can be justified that this may have been hard for the father to do, but the very idea of showing a family member that unconditional love is even being questioned is, in itself, a despicable act. I don't care what any book says about that.

Now on top of this, imagine living in a society that has a good chunk of discrimination towards who you are. In that situation, anyone on the receiving end of this needs all of the support they can. Now, imagine how it would feel if the ones who should be providing the most support for you, the ones who should be standing up for who you are, decide "nope, we're no longer supporting who you are", then how would that make them feel?

Say a child came to you, and claimed that they were being bullied. He is clearly distressed and scared. Do you see any right or wrong side to this? Do you perceive the actions of the bully as wrong because they go against your perceived limitations as to what a bully's role is? Maybe the bully's beliefs are unquestionable...the line has to be drawn somewhere. 

As I said before, I wish the son all of the support in the world. He came out, thinking that being honest with his father was the right thing to do, and the father showed him otherwise. The father, once again as I've mentioned before, done nothing legally wrong, but out of all the ways to handle this, he chose to disown his own son. It was approached in a way that showed no remorse whatsoever. No "I love you, but....", just flat out dosownment. Tell me, why should those who insult the father relax when he couldn't even provide the same kind of constraint and reasoning with his own son? In that sense, this is a father that cannot be reasoned with.

I can forsee deep regret from this father on (or close to) his deathbed, that he spent all of his life hating, and it cost him a life with his son. You only get one chance at that... 

Atheism isn't that illogical at all.  While we live in a world, where, yes, religion is a thing and therefore it forces people to consider the possibility of a divine creator, the fact of the matter is that there's absolutely no logic backing up the idea that the world, or at least the universe, was created by a higher power.  Science does plenty to support the theory that there is no god by taking away all the things he supposedly did.  While we're still left with a 'beginning' or 'origin' to explain, making a higher power explain it just opens up more questions, such as "If god created the universe, what created God?"  Beliving that the universe was not created by a higher power is not illogical, it makes perfect sense from a scientific standpoint. 

frankly, your crusade agaisnt atheism is really not winning you any favors. 

And what does your picture prove?  It has nothing to do with our argument.  Basically it says that people only believe what's convenient for them at the time, which really isn't an argument in favor of anything you seem to believe in. 

It's very dishonest. Bold is a very dishonest statement. The question remains for the atheist as much as for the deist.

What are you debating for if you're not going to be genuine in your approach?

It's very dishonest. Bold is a very dishonest statement. The question remains for the atheist as much as for the deist.

What are you debating for if you're not going to be genuine in your approach?

EDIT: Unless I misunderstand what you mean. Maybe the thought wasn't pushed far enough for you to understand why I might have misread you. For oringins, someone may also find an answer (such as alternate universes and the ability for two universes to intersect). At that point, you would once again be left with a question to answer. So naturalism and faith both lead to the infinite need for answers. Why would one be simple than another?