
The Burden of Proof Hypocrisy - Including Pascal’s wager:
Theist says: “God exists. and I have Pascal’s wager to prove it.
Anti-theist says: “I have the reverse wager to prove he doesn’t”
Both carry the burden of proof and yet neither provide it and most of all both arguments are BS! Both arguments just discuss what’s a better bet at the track, or the “But religion prevents me from living my fullest life” — F’Me are you kidding?… You want to use that BS as an argument for or against the existence or eternal life, or wager your eternal existence on either position? My God if you put credit into either of those two propositions you are Stupid as fck!
English















