Militant Ignostic Weak Agnostic Atheism!

i suggest you take hint from my previous post, scroll down to where i clearly outline my original philosophies and what would be acceptable and required for me to concede defeat, and do it. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- i posted my views of M.I.W.A.A. and outlined what exactly it was. Your job as the opponent was to attack its logic and flaws, present your side of the argument (opposing views), and provide evidence supporting your side. Ideally, that would happen, then I would continue on to defend my side of the debate, responding to the arguments and evidence you would have given to oppose my original post. Then we would continue, responding to each others' arguments and evidence with more of our own. So far, none of that has happened. In accepting this debate, you've done nothing but waste my time, and have uselessly occupied a position that would've been much better suited to someone that would have taken this seriously. Instead you've turned this into another typical "internet argument". Your first response was slightly promising then it quickly became a joke. I honestly want to have a serious, intellectual debate about this so if you'd still be interested i that, or if there are any other takers, message me and we can continue elsewhere. Seriously, why come here wasting both of our time if you're not gunna take this seriously? You seem to have an attitude problem, not to mention the inability to read, or to present anything with logic or evidence or facts. Things like "Obviously the one with baby eyes would take the more likely one as truth (God) from his perspective." is a statement with NOTHING to support it. No supporting arguments, no logic, no facts, no evidence... nothing. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "I only need to show flaws in your statement" - and you have yet to. "There's nothing for me to defend, you show me something I should defend. From there I prove you wrong." - read my previous posts^ "No, I don't need anyone to tell me that." - so you admit religion isn't necessary at all for morality. "Im afraid people generally speaking are materialistic and not altruistic ; secular kids learn from the media . Even if presumingly they are - there is no reason to assume that an atheist would be as devote as an theist." - are materialistic... because? i agree they are, but again you're not using any supporting arguments or evidence. same can be said of the statement that secular kids learn from the media. "What does know what one experiences." - and your english is beginning to quickly break down. i'll assume that meant 'what does one know about what one experiences'? or maybe 'what do you know aboutwhat one experiences'? in either case or another, how is this in any way refuting any of my original philosophies? "" we both have biased opinions" I don't" - your last sentence is definitive proof that at the very least, YOU do. "He provided no refutation." - neither did you. "Its not what I am supposed to do...Did you admit that you're taking a side." - very nice argument there. clap... clap... clap... facepalm. i await your final "response". i suggest you take hint from my previous post, scroll down to where i clearly outline my original philosophies and what would be acceptable and required for me to concede defeat, and do it. i'll even have this copy pasted to the top so i can be sure you won't skip this part when you fail to read my entire post, yet again.