To argue for anything without evidence and then to ignorantly substitute evidence with the word faith and call it proof is to deny reality. While some forms of atheism are arrogant I do believe that agnosticism is the correct stance on this issue and until further evidence is displayed on the side that is arguing to prove something exists instead of taking the default position which is to deny something that lacks demonstrable evidence. I do very wish this poll had a "No, but there is a chance" option I could pick so as to not sound so arrogant, but unfortunately, this is not the case.
I do object to the idea of organized religion in the sense that they are almost based entirely on myths which are often disproved using modern scientific research, conductive thinking, and logic. They also serve to promote violence, discrimination, and serve to make others think better of themselves than others.
Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence, this is correct. However, as Robert Flint said
I do object to the idea of organized religion in the sense that they are almost based entirely on myths which are often disproved using modern scientific research, conductive thinking, and logic. They also serve to promote violence, discrimination, and serve to make others think better of themselves than others.
Absence of evidence does not mean evidence of absence, this is correct. However, as Robert Flint said
