Ah, yes, the old "you can't prove a negative" gambit. Well, you can't prove that there isn't an incorporeal flying dragon that breathes heatless flame hovering in my garage. You can't prove that there isn't a teapot orbiting Alpha Centauri. But does it make sense to believe either? Does it make sense to demand that lawmakers acknowledge the presence of the incorporeal dragon when drafting legislation? Does it make sense to require schoolchildren to stand and declare fealty to the orbiting teapot every day?

The ads in question here aren't trying to convince anyone that there is or is not a deity (or dragon, or teapot). They're trying to point out that one particular claim being made by follo...

Ah, yes, the old "you can't prove a negative" gambit. Well, you can't prove that there isn't an incorporeal flying dragon that breathes heatless flame hovering in my garage. You can't prove that there isn't a teapot orbiting Alpha Centauri. But does it make sense to believe either? Does it make sense to demand that lawmakers acknowledge the presence of the incorporeal dragon when drafting legislation? Does it make sense to require schoolchildren to stand and declare fealty to the orbiting teapot every day?

The ads in question here aren't trying to convince anyone that there is or is not a deity (or dragon, or teapot). They're trying to point out that one particular claim being made by followers of the deity/dragon/teapot is patently false: that all morality flows from the deity/dragon/teapot.

Followers of the Abrahamic religions point to Psalm 53 to support their claims: "The fool hath said in his heart, There is no God. Corrupt are they, and have done abominable iniquity: there is none that doeth good. ... Every one of them is gone back: they are altogether become filthy; there is none that doeth good, no, not one."

The ads are just the freethinking community saying, "That's not true, and you know it." It's a far cry from proselytizing.

Okay, I just realized I was responding to the original slogan ("You can be good without God") and not the new one ("In the beginning, man created God"). Basically, feel free to ignore everything after the first paragraph of my previous comment.

Here's the real question: why is everyone so upset? Are Christians not satisfied with having control of the entire executive branch, Supreme Court, and 497 of 535 legislators? (37 of the remaining 38 are Jewish.) Are you not satisfied with having your buildings in every neighborhood, with your signboards on every street corner and plastered on vehicles across the country?

Why is "If you don't believe exactly what I believe, then my invisible frien...

Okay, I just realized I was responding to the original slogan ("You can be good without God") and not the new one ("In the beginning, man created God"). Basically, feel free to ignore everything after the first paragraph of my previous comment.

Here's the real question: why is everyone so upset? Are Christians not satisfied with having control of the entire executive branch, Supreme Court, and 497 of 535 legislators? (37 of the remaining 38 are Jewish.) Are you not satisfied with having your buildings in every neighborhood, with your signboards on every street corner and plastered on vehicles across the country?

Why is "If you don't believe exactly what I believe, then my invisible friend is going to torture you forever" acceptable, but "I don't think your invisible friend exists" not?