Please feel free to E-mail me with your own comments on this issue or on anything else included in my Philosophy of Life section. This is the last of a three-part reply. If there are competing beliefs and the preponderance of evidence stacks up with one of them, the beliefs are no longer co-equal. Personal preference is no substitute, nor is it an argument in favor of either side. There are many competing beliefs about God, including the belief there is no God, and none have any supporting evidence.
None is inherently superior to the other.
Personal preference is the only possible arbitrator. There is no evidence, one way or another. Either position, of belief or non-belief, is equally logical and rational. Belief without evidence is neither logical or rational. Non-belief due to lack of evidence is both logical and rational.