In My Humble Opinion Religion Really SUXX - I Collected a LOT of Anti-Jesus Memes... Allah, Buddha, KRSNA and Flying Spaghetti Monster Satirized TOO...
One of the Problems with Religious People IS: Some are Not Only Freaking Insane but Dangerous TOO! I believe That EVERYONE in America Remembers That Osama bin Laden Wrapped a TOWEL Around his Head... Because He Believes in ALLAH and Moe-Ham-Mad... and He Convinced a Buncha FREAKS to Hijack Airplanes and Fly them Into The World Trade Center and the Pentagon... Killing 3,000 Americans... So It's Pretty Easy to Conclude that Towelheads are a Danger to People Worldwide...
and... It's difficult to forget that Many Catholic Priests are Very Fond of Molesting Young Boys... but You have to remember that Priests take a "Vow of Chasity" and That Means NO SEX with Women... OF COURSE That Job Attracts FREAKS...
Man don't you get sick of the preposterous statement "you can't prove god doesn't exist" 
I well here comes the answer. I would tell them "It is not my job to prove that, as the claim is all you, which means the burden of proof has nothing to do with me. Not being convinced in a claim is not the same as making a claim". Same exact thing as telling them they cannot prove that leprechauns are not real, and I can say that without believing in leprechauns my own self. Unfalsifiable claims are called that for a reason lol. If a person is genuinely expecting you to prove that God is not real, they obviously do not even get that the God claim is an unfalsifiable claim. Typically, a large portion of what theists tend to believe are outright unfalsifiable claims. It is like a flood gate, once people start using the phony system of "faith", they start justifying some insane things, and without the need for any shred of evidence, they can spout complete lies, and in some cases lies that can be proven to be lies, they will still hold onto them, as the very way we measure evidence "science", they tend to disregard completely. In essence, I would say "I don't have to do any work towards proving or disproving your unfalsifiable claim", and maybe also say that "merely thinking a thought, does not make it true or fact" lol, sad enough to even have to say those things with a straight face, but yes that is where we are at as a species.
I well here comes the answer. I would tell them "It is not my job to prove that, as the claim is all you, which means the burden of proof has nothing to do with me. Not being convinced in a claim is not the same as making a claim". Same exact thing as telling them they cannot prove that leprechauns are not real, and I can say that without believing in leprechauns my own self. Unfalsifiable claims are called that for a reason lol. If a person is genuinely expecting you to prove that God is not real, they obviously do not even get that the God claim is an unfalsifiable claim. Typically, a large portion of what theists tend to believe are outright unfalsifiable claims. It is like a flood gate, once people start using the phony system of "faith", they start justifying some insane things, and without the need for any shred of evidence, they can spout complete lies, and in some cases lies that can be proven to be lies, they will still hold onto them, as the very way we measure evidence "science", they tend to disregard completely. In essence, I would say "I don't have to do any work towards proving or disproving your unfalsifiable claim", and maybe also say that "merely thinking a thought, does not make it true or fact" lol, sad enough to even have to say those things with a straight face, but yes that is where we are at as a species.
Imagine that, despite none of the tests being successful, you wish to be scrupulously open-minded. So you don't outright reject the notion that there's a fire-breathing dragon in my garage. You merely put it on hold. Present evidence is strongly against it, but if a new body of data emerge you're prepared to examine it and see if it convinces you. Surely it's unfair of me to be offended at not being believed; or to criticize you for being stodgy and unimaginative — merely because you rendered the Scottish verdict of "not proved."
Imagine that things had gone otherwise. The dragon is invisible, all right, but footprints are being made in the flour as you watch. Your infrared detector reads off scale. The spray paint reveals a jagged crest bobbing in the air before you. No matter how skeptical you might have been about the existence of dragons —to say nothing about invisible ones —you must now acknowledge that there's something here, and that in a preliminary way it's consistent with an invisible, fire breathing dragon.
Now another scenario: Suppose it's not just me. Suppose that several people of your acquaintance, including people who you're pretty sure don't know each other, all tell you they have dragons in their garages — but in every case the evidence is maddeningly elusive. All of us admit we're disturbed at being gripped by so odd a conviction so ill supported by the physical evidence. None of us is a lunatic. We speculate about what it would mean if invisible dragons were really hiding out in garages all over the world, with us humans just catching on. I'd rather it not be true, I tell you. But maybe all those ancient European and Chinese myths about dragons weren't myths at all. . .
Gratifyingly, some dragon-size footprints in the flour are now reported. But they're never made when a skeptic is looking. An alternative explanation presents itself: On close examination it seems clear that the footprints could have been faked. Another dragon enthusiast shows up with a burnt finger and attributes it to a rare physical manifestation of the dragon's fiery breath. But again, other possibilities exist. We understand that there are other ways to burn fingers besides the breath of invisible dragons. Such "evidence" —no matter how important the dragon advocates consider it—is far from compelling. Once again, the only sensible approach is tentatively to reject the dragon hypothesis, to be open to future physical data, and to wonder what the cause might be that so many apparently sane and sober people share the same strange delusion.
-The Demon-Haunted World: Science as a Candle in the Dark – by Carl Sagan and Ann Druyan, 1997
If we accept that any belief is valid if it can't be disproven, then my claim about the Flying Spaghetti Monster creating the universe with His noodly appendage is as valid as the Christian claim of a deity creating the world in seven days. In fact, the Flying Spaghetti Monster's existence is backed by empirical evidence!
Did you know that as the number of pirates has decreased, global warming has gotten worse? Now, that's empirical evidence for the Flying Spaghetti Monster's influence if I've ever seen it! That's more than I can say for walking on water or resurrecting from the dead!
In fact, there's evidence of the Flying Spaghetti Monster everywhere you look! Every time you see a bowl of spaghetti, that's evidence. Just look around you! How can you deny it all!?
Every time you feel a sense of peace while eating pasta, that's His Noodly Appendage touching you. And let's not forget the global decline in pirates, which has led to an increase in global warming! Exactly as the Gospel of the Flying Spaghetti Monster predicted. 
Now, my deity just wants us to enjoy pasta and live in harmony. No eternal damnation, no original sin, just endless pasta bowls. If we're going to accept one set of unprovable claims, why not accept them all? After all, can you disprove that His Divine Sauciness isn't the true architect of reality? If not, then ALL HAIL THE ALMIGHTY NOODLE! 
R'amen!
R'amen!So, let us sauce;
Our Noodly Appendage, who art in a colander,
Draining be your noodles.
Thy noodles come,
Thy sauce be yum,
On top some grated Parmesan.
Give us this day our garlic bread,
And forgive us our trespasses,
As we forgive those who trample on our lawns.
And lead us not into vegetarianism,
But deliver us some pizza,
For thine is the meatball, the noodle, and the sauce,
Forever and ever.
R'amen.
.jpg)
%20(1)%20(1).jpg)
