[Dimensio]

I would have replied, but exmarine has shown that he's completely dishonest. He insists that established logical fallacies are valid argument techniquest, including strawman arguments (like his utterly false claim regarding atheists) and argument from the consequences (where he argues that atheism is obviously false because he doesn't like what he perceives as the consequences of it).

[OWK]

I have traveled that road myself.

Not really worth the effort.

[Revolting cat!]

Perhaps I'm not a "true atheist" or, perhaps -- more likely -- you're a presumptious twit.

How intelligent! How witty! How original! What a departure from the usual cliche that would say "perhaps -- more likely -- I'm a presumptious twit." What a sophisticated intellectual refutation of Dostoyevsky's statement, and of the widely accepted version of the causes of the 20th century horrors. We might as well surrender to the moral code of the atheists. But which ones? Oh, I'll take Woody Allen's atheistic standards.

"If there is no God, then everything is permitted" -- Fyodor Dostoyevsky