Why so?

because neither side has the ability to prove their side or disprove the other side

Why do they lack this ability?

it's not a worthwhile argument to have

What makes it not worthwhile?

I claim it is misguided; 'an error of judgement' to assume that there are facts pointing towards the objective existence of god, worshipping is an act derived from belief in the conditioned existence of god, I question why people should be conditioned to such a belief?

prove to me that God doesn't exist

you can't, just like I can't prove that He does

I can't because I lack the evidence

not because I lack the ability

I have the tools to do so

no evidence = no ability to disprove

In the same way you can't disprove the tooth fairy, but I suppose this is another opinion.

do you, though? Nobody has disproven the existence of God

You might

you might not

🤷

Well they have disproved the Abrahamic god's capacity for all-power, all-knowledge, all-mercy

with respect, that's word salad lol

I assume you're familiar with the 'god can't create a rock that he can't move'

There’s no evidence either way, so the logical assumption is to assume the negative as the negative side is passive. The active side has the burden of proof.

Right

And the passive side is that we don't know and shouldn't take it as fact, so it isn't worthy of humouring

Otherwise we'd pray to every magical being ever, do every irrational thing ever.

in a traditional argument, absolutely

this is a discussion about the existence of a deity lol

So?

The main issue with the existence of god is that it’s a spiritualistic argument. So the most logical position is agnosticism

Should I disregard every 'traditional argument' because it regards X thing I believe to be greater than the rest of NOT X things?

Most atheists in practice are agnostics who assume the negative rather than default

that's what I was trying to get at, thank you @wiping account (DM for more info

it's a pointless discussion

Yes, I never claim to disprove god...

no offense Romerlin :P

Don't try to weasle out big boi

It’s only pointless when both already realize that god can’t be proven

I claim to argue that worshipping god is ubsurd

Because it can’t be proven right?

Yes, it can't be proven or empirically shown so why should it be humoured?

if something can be neither proven or disproven, it follows that any assessment should be treated as an opinion

until absolute evidence is found to back up either side