Uses of Commonsense against the rabble

"Like, how can anyone know with absolute certainty that everything is relative? Simply not possible.

It’s like when people tell you - there is no God. Then you immediately know you are speaking to a fool. One can say - I don’t believe in God, or, I think the existence of God is highly unlikely, and get away with it. But as soon as one categorically asserts - there is no God - a fool is revealed.

You see, it is not possible to know beyond doubt, there is no God. Of course, when the day arrives, where it is possible to create conscious awareness by mixing some chemicals in a laboratory, you could rule out God to a certain extent. But even if it were possible to create life from chemicals, it would not rule out God 100 %."

This is philosophy post-Constantine. Silliness. The writer is astute enough to see that one cannot believe in nothing (that itself is a belief in something) yet is so culturally biased by religion and inculcated (drawn and learned) in the rote traditions that he cannot see that any God concept, and certainly his God concept, is devoid of meaning and "of course" people can see it is untrue "beyond doubt." What they should say (the evil atheist person), though, rather than "not possible" is that it is incoherent and not useful. They might also add he should shut up until he reads something that removes all emotional baggage, not just a small compartmentalized portion.