Debate: is god true?
Side: no ,god is not true

Good grief, you're annoying.Don't let it get to you mate, it is only a discussion.I invite you to study on your own. You either forgot everything you learned about God or didn't pay attention in the first placeI have read a bit in my personal time on religions, but I'm loving your broad generalizations about me based on your incomprehension of what I'm actually trying to say. The thing is that I do use the term Atheist but as Dawkins states of himself I also hang just on the verge of Atheism and off the back of agnosticism. There is for me no definite evidence of God, I don't believe the Bible is trust-able and I especially despise organized religion, now I know it gives hope to a lot of people, but it also strips away individuality in an attempt to create a conformity through personal sacrifice. I have seen first hand the ridiculous behavior of devout Roman Catholics, walking bare-foot through the streets of my city carrying aloft a statue of Mary of something or other. How is this rational behavior, some pontiff or cardinal at some time decided it was a good thing to do and hey-presto it became something to do to prove your devotion. I accuse you of being arrogant and having tunnel vision not because you believe what you believe (that is your choice) but the way you communicate that you believe me to be of less understanding and comprehension of the Universe and the spiritual and even the intellectual. Even in this argument you deem me a fool and call me annoying, your capacity to jump to insult is quite funny, and telling.It's dumb to accuse someone for not believing in something that is not a part of their faith,I didn't do this, I used Islam only as an example, I hoped that you would see this and as the intellectual theist provide maybe some evidence as to why your version of events are right and theirs is not. Instead you again throw insult.Your argument is not worth responding to in full because you are a narrow-minded fool who is himself full of all of the vices he points out in other people.Maybe I am, your attitude didn't stop me responding to your debates, for this is the point of what this site is about. If you can't answer to my posts then that I understand, but your defensive position and call for me to read your other debates (none of which answer my questions) show to me that you can't take this argument further than you already have. I know your side of things already, even though I do not agree with them.And I know your side of things even though I don't agree with them Is this not the root of debate.Explaining faith to you is like trying to explain how to use the Internet to a stubborn old lady who refuses technology.I know what faith is, I was once a part of your flock, I saw the argument from both sides eventually and decided for myself, yet again your analogy breaks down for I already know what it feels like to one hundred percent believe and I have already gone through the Roman Catholic paces, I don't know you so I'll refrain from casting broad generalizations about you but if I was to assume anything about you I would assume that the difference between me and you is that you have not walked on this side of the line and therefore are the analogous Old woman calling the computer evil and refusing to listen as the technology just seems out of reach, stubborn, arrogant and not open to the new, firmly imprisoned in the dogma and way of life that is out of date, maybe because the other side seems scary and opening yourself to it has been forbidden.You don't know how much it could improve your life, and you don't want to try to understand. I implore your to research.What makes you think my life needs improving, I'm quite happy where I am, doing what I'm doing in life.