The debate about the existence, or otherwise, of some God or other is an interesting and welcome change from the empty rhetoric of the vego-wafflers.
It would seem that the burden of proof rests with monotheists (or polytheists), since blind unquestioning faith and all the posturing that goes with it are no arguments.
The believers cannot provide any concrete evidence (the operative word) to establish a viable case. For the atheists, their case is validated by virtue of a de facto statement: No evidence, no God. Or, as some folks would have it: “Put up, or shut up”.
On this speck of dust we all call home, sentience demands that homo sapiens asks the Big Questions, exclusively from a purely human perspective. We have no other options, and our collective parochial mentality restricts us as such. In short we don’t know, and the Goddists should have the good grace to admit it, as irreligionists might have it. To put this into perspective, and to paraphrase Carl von Clausewitz, religion is “politics by other means” and as such is about a struggle for control and influence.
The issues of control, and indeed “hearts and minds”, even extends to one’s personal proclivities; Roman Catholic priests have been alleged to chastise crypto-masturbators, promising fire and brimstone as their reward for commiting Onan’s “sin” of “spilling their seed on the ground”. In that context there are some of my fellow contributors who are damned already, if one gets my drift.