Andrew the Atheist says, "Paging Mr. Thurman. Mr. Thurman, you have a telephone call at the front desk."

Pee Wee:  I know you are but what am I?
Francis:  I know YOU are but what am I?
both: I know YOU are but what am I?
         NO
        Stop
        Cut it out
        Shut up
Pee Wee:  Why don't you make me?
Francis:  Why don't YOU make ME?
Pee Wee:  Because I don't make monkeys.  I just train them!
Francis:  Pee Wee, listen to reason.
               PEE WEE!
Pee Wee:  SHHhhh!  I'm listening to reason.


So we've decided to go for the red herring.  Now why did I say this is a red herring?  Because this is a distraction from the real issue.  Faith requires no evidence.  That is to say, if you have evidence, there is no need for faith.  Further, I stand by my definition of the term as it relates to belief and evidence.

Faith is not hope.  Hope is hope.  You can hope for something and have no evidence for it.  For example, I might hope to win the lottery.  There is no evidence that I will win the lottery.  There is good reason to believe I will NOT win the lottery.  I can hope, nonetheless.

I never said that believers believe for no reason.  I said believers do not have a RATIONAL reason for belief.  Believers believe on faith, not evidence, and therefore, the belief is not rational.  This is not unfair.  This is reality.  There was a commenter once who posted that if I asked 100 people why they believed, I'd get at least 100 different answers.  I'd agree.  I'd also assert that none of those reasons would be based on evidence.  They would be based on illogical thinking, irrational conclusions, or personal experiences or anecdotes that are unscientific or arguments from ignorance.  In other words, they would be based on faith.

I make no distinction between what you call "blind faith" and faith.  They are the same.  Like "no duh" and "duh".  All faith is blind.  There is none that is not.  All faith is irrational.

Now, the atheist has no requirement to prove gods do not exist.  Remember what happened when I asserted I have a dragon in my pants?  What happened?  No one believed me.  People demanded real evidence and did not accept my anecdote.  So should it be with gods, and I think gods should be HARDER to prove than a dragon in my pants.

My dragon is invisible.  It exists outside of our perception of time and space.  You cannot prove the dragon does not exist.  It manifests itself though my experience and through my life.  You can experience it too if you open your heart and nostrils at the right time and place.  Until you think it is more rational to believe there IS a dragon in my pants than to believe there is NOT, atheism is more rational than theism.  Deal with it.