I suppose I'm a slave to a good facepalm.  Should just leave, but arguing is just too fun!  

I don't get religion?  so...let me get this straight...I spent over 20 years of my life as a christian, about 16 of them pretty damn devout until the community started showing the holes in logic and the terrible nature of the belief system, yet becuase I don't conform to your naiive, entirely-too-optimistic view of what Christianity should be, I don't get it?  

It's very clear you're blinded by your faith, and as infectiously optimistic as it is, is wholly depressing and only further proves the point in the OP. 

So tell me, do you have arguments to back up all 8 points I made?  can you prove that there is a god, that  he did write a book, that christianity is the least compromised of all the religions, or better yet th at your bible is infallible and that your assertions are little more than nitpicking and selective faith?  

I find it weird that we're still trying to have political/religious discussions the same way on the internets in 2013 when it's obvious how this always goes. I figured out a long time ago that most people who are attracted to those threads are the pushy opinionated, love-for-controversy types who try to pose opinions as fact. It's not the topic that is a problem, it's the people trying to push their own POV are overwhelming to the discussion. Usually involves people telling things at each other and nobody is ever really listening. Nobody is looking to change their own point of view. I may share my own but I expect nobody but the people who can relate to it care and are really listening lol... I still might share, but I don't want to 'debate' something I firmly believe.

Now, it would be different if somebody opened up an honest thread about themselves looking for objective spiritual advice relative to their own life theory where everyone is talking about how they've come to their own conclusions. That would be more helpful usually. It's incredibly easy for people to resort to personal attacks otherwise, because everyone wants to control the discussion and exchange of logic in a religion versus non-religion thread. The problem is, too many ideas and too much going on at once. It's a no-brainer for me why it goes bad.

Edit: Well, maybe political topics are easier... but it just depends on how broad. The broader, more divided the range of the topic, the worse I think.

The gut-twisting issue is that forceable removal of religion is nearly the same as forcing religion on
someone.

When you're an atheist you turn away from religion for a couple of reasons. One, because it's irrational bullshit. Two, because you're rejecting the control of others. It's about self determination. Violating the right of self determination by forcing someone to give up religion is, well, bad.

Historically, it turns out bad too. You really can't force any population to change religion. They'll cling to it until death. In fact, the harder you try to force the harder they cling. History is brimming full of examples of this concept, recent and past.

You can convince people that their religion is wrong and they will abandon it. Those that cannot be convinced are damaged, and the best you can do is prevent the harm they cause to themselves and to others (including their own children). Continue to emphasize education and rational thinking and religion will simply become a thing of history.

Couldn't agree more. The problem is......this is true in the real world as well, where the people who talk the loudest and spark the biggest controversies get the most face-time. The people really trying to tackle these issues are largely ignored. Then in the off-chance they do get referenced, its generally out of context.

I am increasingly annoyed by the religious communities crying out for respect and sensitivity when dealing with their respective religions. Where is the sensitivity and respect when they actively bully, repress and make pariahs certain sections of society to fullfil this perverse need to satisfy the heads of the most elaborate myths ever conceived? I am unconcerned over whether this offends the religious; I would not personally insult any individual person here or on the street but I am not ashamed to mock and ignore the fairytales that rival all fairytales. If religion were nothing more than an amusing side folly of life that people practised privately then I would be all for it but religion has NO place and NO right in deciding laws that affect the lives of everyone in a certain country, as quite often religious bigotry negatively affects life for all.

Immortal, i just dont have patience anymore. I tried debating, i tried to make them see logic but they refuse, so i stoped caring. Is that that difficult to understand?

It has nothing to do with intelligence levels. I just dont have anymore patience to engage on those fruitless debates.

You want me to? I could, but then all the religious trolls come here with ridiculous arguments like its all been predicted in their "read me as you like" book that is 100% historically correct and was most definitly not written by some human trying to take advantage of ignorance. Also, they will tell you that their new book is 100% more likely to be true than all the others written in the past and were proven false. They have no case whatsoever, yet they persist. I am not close minded, i see whats in front of me, i just got tired of wasting my time.

Present to me proof or logic in the possibility of there beeing a God. Any example from the past, any logic that just doesnt come off from thin-air or questionable source. Something i can verify and is logic from there. And please no more lies and half truths from the questionable book. The book is 100% not the word of a God. The levels of arrogance in thinking you would be God's favorite is also another reason not to believe any of it.

Yeah, it's amazing the lengths and leaps of faith the spiritual will go through to justify their religion as being right.  As noted in the OP, You can't prove god in the first place, but assuming you can, you still need to prove that God created the world and man in his image (which is hard considering the evidence to the contrary), you need to prove that YOUR god is the right god out of the thousands throughout history, you need to prove that your book was not tampered with and is the unadulturated truth of that god, and that your interpretation of that book is not flawed or inconsistent.  

That's a lot of leaps of faith for something people care so deeply about.  If logic had any say in an argument about God and Religion in general, then at the most someone would be agnostic or generic spiritual.  there's absolutely nothing in history that would indicate that such a powerful book would be pure, or that one religion is more right than another, given Man's fetish for controlling others and being cruel to each other.  

Even if there is a god, I wouldn't beleive for a second that any of our religions are the right one.  Even if there is a god, what are the chances that God's word hasn't been tarnished by years of human tampering?  

As a man of science, I chose to not have faith in such long odds.  

Yes. Can you prove otherwise?

Well hey, if you've got all the answers, why not enlighten us?  

And your statement actually proves her point really, really well.  time to put your money where your mouth is. 

@DaRev

Extraordinary claims require extraordinary proof. Disproving a negative isn't a acceptable argument in any court be it civil, criminal, or that of public opinion. It is purely the last resort of the guilty, and those who know that they are in the wrong. This defense is fundamentally the lack of any defense at all. You cannot put forward a theory to actually be proven wrong. If you haven't provided evidence for its correctness. In simpler language you cannot put forward a case to be disproved if you haven't even made a good faith effort to prove it in the first place.

That said its just plain stupid to float the argument in the first place, because society has rejected such arguments. For good reason, because it is immoral, anarchical, and antisocial. If we accepted such a logic. Then every single murderer would be set free to kill as many times as they liked, because they could just say some fantasy creature really did the killing, and since we can't possibly disprove that argument with absolute certainty. They they must in fact be innocent.

Basically if we accept such a logic in any form we invite the dissolution of our society, and probably our very own survival as a species. Deductive reasoning is at the heart of all human activities. Hell even lower order primates understand that mental process. Their first act is never going to be to discount the least likely possibility. As other posters may say stupid argument is stupid.