The Belief in atheist Dogma is a Mental Disorder

To my note on the clinical unsoundness of insanity, pro states:"You were wrong on both counts, though."Pro has offered no reason as to why I am incorrect: In the entire DSM IV , there is only one entry of the word "insanity" and it is in the context of the effects of Hallucinogen-Related Disorders--"Tearfulness and anxiety may become intense, with dread of insanity or death." Insanity per se is not a symptom of anything, only the fear of it can be a symptom. I said:""Pro says that they did not make a claim that the failure to account for objective morality translates into a clinical issue."Pro says: "No, I never said that -- stop lying."However, I said: "Pro"s claim seems to be that the atheist cannot account for objective morals so he/she has a mental disorder"Pro says: "Nope, I never made that claim either -- again, straw man on your part."So which is it? This a contradiction.I said: "Pro argues that the atheist cannot account for objective morality, which in turn degrades moral character which produces immoral acts that therefore are deviant, or insane per pro's nomenclature; ergo, the failure to account for objective morality entails a clinical disposition; this is entirely sequitur."Pro says: "I never made the statements you claimed I made above -- that is yet another straw man logical fallacy on your part."However, pro exactly says this: "Because it fails as a worldview to provide the basis for objective moral values, the belief in atheist Dogma inevitably leads to corruption of moral character, which naturally leads to such horrible activities as murder, rape, racism, war, poverty, genocide, and all other sorts of man-made calamities. If they can't be helped by psychological treatment, then they should be deported. In fact, most psychologists define "insanity" as displaying behaviors and beliefs that fall outside the standard range of normalcy, and that is exactly what the belief in atheist Dogma is " a collection of beliefs and behaviors that fall outside the standard range of normalcy""It is a response to your non-argument, for which you offered exactly zero evidence."Well, I actually gave a brief argument in R2 to which you didn't respond. Pro asserts the onus is shared; no, the BoP is always on pro; everyone knows this. Pro says they never made the assertion that atheism is a mental illness; LOOK AT THE RESOLUTION.Pro says:"Oh, you poor kid -- you don't know what the word "subjective" means! LOL get a dictionary maybe?" I gave an account of what I meant by ontologically subjective, i.e., relating to a SUBJECT. Pro says :"Actually, the statement 2 + 2 = 4 is objectively true."Yes, I conveyed it's EPISTEMICALLY objective, not ONTOLOGICALLY. Pro says:"Well, it is your question, not mine, so there's no surprise that it's incoherent -- so is the rest of your ridiculous and sophomoric drivel."It was rhetorical. Remember, the resolution is: "The Belief in atheist Dogma is a Mental Disorder".I gave a thorough account of why this would be incredibly difficult; pro has given no differential diagnosis, no account of what kind of mental disorder, etc.Pro has put forth such ridiculous trolling that I cannot bring myself to dignify this with a response. Voters, pro has in no way upheld the BoP.