Evil proves God does not exist

A premise of Pros argument is "A3) God can put the universe in any state (A2)" I challenge this premise. Do you mean God can put the universe in any possible state, or any state. If you mean any possible state then I have no objection. If you mean God can put the universe in any state then this is false. Consider this example, God creates an Immovable objection and a force that moves anything. But what happens when the two meet ? either the object will be moved (thus its not unmovable) or the force won't move it (thus the force doesn't move everything). The point being you can't demand that God not doing a contradiction some how refutes its existence, since contradictions can't happen. Pro says "I do not mean to imply that necessary pain is good, only necessary, and I would (and did) argue that if God existed than there would be no necessary pain. " God can't get rid of necessary pain cause its necessary, to get rid of something that is necessary is a contradiction. I think this refutes Pro claims that ""If God exists, no pain would be necessary" Pro says "Con repeats his objection to my definition of moral, again I would like to hear an alternate" To do the right thing = Moral , To do the wrong thing = Immoral, is that good enough ? Pro says "First of all, evil is not the opposite of good, bad is the opposite of good. I would say that all pain is bad, however evil refers only to that subset of pain which is unnecessary" You claim that bad is the opposite of good, I seek clarification on this, does saying something is bad have a moral value attached to it ? If it does, isn't this just a reword of evil ? Pro says "Good, being the opposite of bad, would refer to those actions which cause pleasure. " I reject this moral theory, some people get pleasure out of raping children, under this moral theory its "good". I anticipate an objection along the lines that its not good cause the child being raped doesn't enjoy it and experiences pain. But what if the pleasure of the rapist is of greater amount of the pain experienced by the child ? is the act of rapeing the child good or bad ? According to this good = pleasure. .. .. . bad = pain view. Pro says "One could imagine defining an anti-evil word, rightous, to refer to that subset of good which is unnecessary, this would be the opposite of evil. " I don't understand this, please reword and rephrase it. Pro says "I have objections to this, but I think this is a perfect time to say, 'so what'. I already agree that good exists, it is completely irrelevant to evil disproving God. " No, it seems to me your only agreeing that good exists as you defined it, obviously I am challenging that. I don't accept your concept of "good" I am asked two questions, which I will answer, and also ask a counter question. Pro asks "1) Is God capable of creating a universe with no evil? " Yes Counter question Is it possible that God could create a world where evil and or suffering exist ? 2) Would God want to create a universe with no evil? (even if you said he could not, he could still want to) I plead ignorance to answer this, but I would concede on the surface it makes intuitive sense that God would want to create a universe with no evil in it. Counter question - Isn't is possible that God could have sufficient reason and moral justification for creating a universe where evil and or suffering exists ? I look forward to Pros reply.