[ScubieNuc]

We don't either.

List, side by side, the Scripture that contradicts infant baptism next to the sources that supposedly support infant baptism. What you will find on the support side, loads of 'early Church father' quotes.

You'll find the same thing on topics such as "Mary without sin", "praying to saints", "praying for the dead", "transubstantiation", "Mary saves", "Mary intercedes", "Salvation through the Catholic church", "Pope infalible", etc., etc..

When your beliefs or doctrines are supported more by 'writtings of early Church fathers' then the Scriptures, you are at least making them equal to Scripture, if not elevating them to be more important then Scripture.

[Campion]

List, side by side, the Scripture that contradicts infant baptism

There is no such Scripture. It doesn't exist.

The arguments which claim to reject infant baptism on a "Scriptural" basis invariably either (a) begin with a theology of baptism in which infant baptism doesn't make sense, thus begging the question; or (b) appeal to the (supposed) silence of Scripture supporting infant baptism as somehow equivalent to Scripture contradicting it.

Absence of Scriptural evidence supporting something is not the same thing as Scripture condemning it, and never will be. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.