WTF??? You presume to tell me why I don't believe in something? I am not sure I have come across such arrogance before.Lack of evidence cannot be a reason for not believing in God. Your current position is 'you do not believe in God', and you have chosen the reason to be 'lack of evidence'.
But to put it simply: you are wrong. The reason I do not believe in God is because i consider there to be a lack of evidence. The same reason I no longer believe in Santa Claus, in the tooth fairy et al.
And the answer remains as before, whether you want to accept it or not: because there is a lack of evidence... and by lack I mean zero... that rationally supports the case for God.From your current position there is nothing pertaining to the outside world (empirical evidence) that can conclusively show that God exists, and as such you will never believe in God unless you accept that God exists.
So the question remains; Why don't you/atheists believe in God?
But don't for one minute presume you know why I believe or don't in something. You have no idea of the journey I or any other atheist went on in reaching our position.
And from my current position you may be correct that there is nothing pertaining to the outside world that can conclusively lead me to believe in God. What of it? How does that invalidate why I don't believe? You honestly think it is simply because I don't want to believe? That somehow all I have to do is choose to believe and I will?
Can you flick a switch that makes you believe in the existence of a moon made entirely of cheese? Or in a celestial teapot, or in the FSM?
"Extremes"? What is the extreme of "I do not believe in God"? Anything further you wish to apply to that statement, any "extreme" notion pertaining to the statement, is nothing other than an unwarranted and unsupported assertion. The entire essay is a biased attempt to frighten children into straying from belief by misrepresenting the other side.I think it's quite a positive essay if we use the terms 'theist' and 'atheist' to their extremes.
The score being how moral one is? Or how much one believes in God?I agree with you on this. I think if theism = 10 (max) and atheism = -10 (min), then everything in between is basically on a scale.
So a score of 0 would mean?
I am not sure I comprehend your intent or message here. Are you implying an atheist and a theist are at opposite extremes in something? They are not even necessarily opposite in the nature of their belief... Theists believe God to exist, and Atheists do not have that belief. They do not necessarily believe God does not exist.
Then I would suggest you refrain from doing so, either through direct generalisations or through implication.I think the mistake that is made all the time, in these discussions, are the generalizations that are made. They are too unrealistic IMO.
Your scoring would be an example of such.