Atheism is a sound position

"Ok. But an atheist will still vote for you because you are non-religious."False, I point back to when I said if anything I'm more deistic (religious) than atheistic (non-religious). Prepare to rise or fall on your own prowress.I will defend atheism with three general arguments that will be outlined below:ARGUMENT ONE: THE PARADOX OF THE STONEThe problem with God existing is simple: God is presumed to be omni-potent, or all-powerful (same thing, just take your pick of wording). If God is omni-potent, then they can supposedly do anything. If that is true, then God would be able to perform the following task:God would be able to create a stone so large that he could not lift it. Clever readers would note that this creates a paradox. If God created a stone so large that he could not lift it, then he could not be all-powerful, because something existed that he could not lift. If God could not create a stone so large he could not lift it, then a task existed that he could not do, thus making him not all powerful. Thus, an all-powerful God could not exist. My opponent may try to respond to this by saying that God is all-powerful and so can limit his power before restoring it, but the problem with this is that saying that an all-powerful God can make himself not all-powerful can't happen because God would still have to be all-powerfull in order to be God. ARGUMENT TWO: THE PROBLEM OF EVILThe above argument takes the form of the following syllogism:P1: If God Existed, there would be no suffering in the world.This is true because an all-powerful, all-loving would want to prevent suffering or end suffering (all-loving part), and has the ability to do it (all-powerful), so if God existed, we can conclude that there would be no suffering or at least very, very little suffering.P2: Suffering exists.Case in point: Africa. Kony2012 anyone? But, just for the lulz, I'll also throw out that there's starvation, drought, death, misery, murder, theft, racism, sexism, ethnic clensing, etc. Suffering clearly existed, and such suffering is clearly preventable by an all-powerful god.C: God can not exist.If an all-powerful, all-loving God can and would prevent or erase suffering, and suffering still exists, then God could not exist, otherwise there wouldn't be any suffering.ARGUMENT THREE: EXTRAORDINARY EVIDENCE FOR AN EXTRAORDINARY CLAIMAs Carl Sagan once pointed out, "Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence" (1). Therefore, the burden of proof has to fall onto the one advocating for the existence of God, as the claims he makes requires evidence. Do not let Con try to win the round simply by trying to refute my arguments and saying "He can't prove atheism is sound, so he can't win". In order to disprove atheism, one would have to prove that theism was true. Otherwise, the default position is closer to atheism and theism, since we aren't born believing in God (agnosticism is the real starting point, otherwise known as weak atheism). So, if my opponent cannot prove God exists, you have to default to the pro, since the default position is atheism.Thus, atheism is a sound position."Atheism is amoral, give me one single logical reason why people should not kill themselves."This presumes that the only place that we can find a source of morality is from religion. However, the massive amount of philosophical literature that never once mentions the name of God, or only mentions the name of God to point out how silly of a concept God is. Such ideas can be:UtilitarianismDeontologyNaturalismEgoismEmpiricismAnd so on. There are other places for moral thought and truth other than religion, and thus can rule out such concepts as suicide. "Absence of Evidence is not the same thing as Evidence of Absence."Refer to my third argument. "Atheism isn't sound because, there is no proof of it being accurate and correct and trying to disprove God within the confines of physics is impossible." Please explain this. If anything, it's GOD that fails to line up with physics, and not the disbelief in God. So, I have to conclude that the resolution is affirmed. My opponent has proved nothing, despite getting an additional round from me for argumentation (the first round) and I'm proving how atheism is sound and why God cannot exist, thus the resolution is affirmed.