This is basically my reaction to a blog posted earlier titled "Questions for atheists."
Here is the first part of that blog:
"I have atheists ask me, "Where did God come from?"; "Who created God?" Well, my answer is that he has always been here. If you can't accept that, then that's your problem."
The poster then goes on to ask questions of atheists that basically amount to "how did matter/the earth/life come into existence?", and "how did species form?"
Now anyone with a ninth-grade education should be able to answer the second question, but that isn't the point I'm trying to make.
At the very beginning of the blog, the poster states that his/her answer to any question regarding God's existence is simply that "he has always been here." And then, and here's the kicker, he/she asks atheists to provide answers to the questions that he/she asks.
Does the blogger not realize that he/she just completely contradicted himself/herself?
I see this a lot in arguments from religious people. They expect you to accept their beliefs without any proof, and then ask for proof of what you believe. Now of course you could provide them with evidence, but the point here isn't so much that they don't have any evidence and you do, but rather that the religious will ask you to prove your scientific standpoint while they can just say "It's my faith" and get away with anything. This is comletely illogical, and it's pretty damn disappointing.