An arguement for Agnoticism - against Atheism.

[Alcon]

I suppose you eventually have to apply the "Easter Bunny doctrine," here.  To what extent is skepticism meaningful if we accept the limitations of human interpretation?  Does it have any meaning beyond that?

I didn't read through all the barf on this thread, but if you still consider yourself a hurfy durfy atheist there are some drugs you need to do

that is all

?

[Alcon]

I think it can all come down to this, simply:

Atheism is based on the lack of proof that God exists. But they cannot prove that he does not exist. Either is possible therefore Agnosticism is the only safe belief.

But, how many people (over six) would self-identify as "unsure" or "skeptic" about the non-existence of the Easter Bunny?  By that very token, there is no Christianity or Judaism anyway, because faith is based in fallible human interpretation.  To not be "unsure" or "skeptical" in that sense would be elevating oneself to omnipotence.