The burden of proof is on believers

[MADem]

157. No, it is not. Those believers do not care what the non-believers think of them.

The believers think the non-believers are wrong, and the non-believers think the believers are wrong.

One side accepts the claim, the other rejects it. The only "happy medium" is to acknowledge that some issues will never be resolved.

Here's a thought--why not "live and let live?" Then there will be no need to "reframe debates" (that aren't going to change any minds, anyway--it's like fight club for keyboarders), personal attacks can be avoided, and no one needs to "put up or shut up."

You can't force people to give a shit what others think. If they think an argument is wrong and stupid, all these demands that people prove their position will fall on deaf ears.

I rather think there wouldn't be any of this "put up or shut up" nonsense if this discussion were transformed to the mountains of Afghanistan, surrounded by the Taliban in a shirty mood wanting to know what sort of infidel they were dealing with, so there's just no need for the tough guy attitude either. It doesn't work, anyway. People who are believers think that non-believers are missing a part, misguided, confused, lacking in understanding/education, or whatever--and they won't be convinced otherwise. Nonbelievers think believers are stupid, unscientific, wearing blinders, etc., etc. There's no coming to terms--it's Hatfields and McCoys.

Let It Go.