Bruce Elwood

Suffice it to say that theist may borrow whatever sectarian thinking they wish, in order to sophisticate their brand and make it easier to sell. In all of theism there is but a single topic that defines the proposition. Is there a god? What is the evidence and is it worthy of conference. I simply note that god is a concept entirely without substance. An excuse for magic for some but more typically a tool for controlling others, at their expense. There is simply no good in it that was not borrowed from more disciplined thinkers.

To confuse faith for reason is a fundamental flaw. Indeed, the notion of faith only exists to replace missing reason. And to confuse a denial of one's hypothesis with a hypothesis in itself is simply an error. If the theism of the hundreds of gods that have been posited by men were each only denied properly by a specific anti theist hypothesis (each an act of faith) then there would be an anti faith for each of the many faiths. This would mean that a Catholic would have hundreds of anti-god faiths for each god he or she though did not exist. The Catholic would be an atheist in the cases of hundreds of faiths he or she denies. This is nuts! Atheism is simply the denial of a theist proposition. It requires no faith and is in no way a 'religion'. There is no cathecism, no dogma, no holy relics, no traditions, no services, no hymns, no baptism or any contrivances what so ever. The theist has an interest in promoting such nonsense because it lowers the simple denial of his position to yet another endless act of faith. It is an absurd argument in my opinion.

It's only my imagination, but think what it would be like if Antonin was poisoned! There is the stuff of a good novel. But on a more serious note, my condolences to the great man's family and friends.