I'd agree, and I think that every person of faith I know would also that blind faith is irrational.
That is my experience as well. Then they go on to describe their faith in exactly the same way anyone would describe blind faith. It is amazing how the brain works.
I don't know a single 'theist' who has nothing else to back up their belief with.
That's interesting. I don't know a single one who has any evidence at all with which to back up their belief. A few have arguments. But arguments are not evidence.
Why put theist in quotes?
Likewise you have faith in your wife based on observation as I have faith in God based on observation.
No. This is what I have a problem with. This sort of conflation. They are not equivalent. You are playing with words to try to say we are the same. We're not. In my example I directly observe a person and her behaviors and actions. You directly obeserve...what? A god? If so, you would be a novelty.
I have no more proof he exists than you do that your wife won't file for divorce tomorrow and take half your stuff with her!- it happens a lot!.
No. You have less. Filing for divorce tomorrow would have evidence. She would have had to make preparations - have an attorney, a place to move to, possibly move money out of our joint account. That there is no money trail, no unaccounted time, no change in behavior, indicates this will not happen tomorrow. Absence of evidence really is evidence of absence, Donald Rumsfeld not withstanding.
The God - if we are talking about the conventional conception of the Abrahamic god - leaves no evidence, by definition. If you anticipate your belief to not have an impact on reality, your belief is an irrelevant one. If I were to believe an invisible, weightless gnome sat on my shoulder all the time, what would be the point? He does nothing, changes no outcome of any situation. Thus, he, like your god, is for all intents and purposes not a part of reality.
But we all committed to those marriages at some point on the same faith as you yes?
No. I have already explained how your religious faith is not comparable to other kinds of faith. In fact, I'd prefer not even use the word. It is ambiguous and tends to be abused by the religious. You people tend to subtly shift the meaning and context, intentionally or not, as you have done above. It would be more above board - and better communication - to say exactly what you mean.
I think the vast majority of us just want to know the truth don't you?
No, I do not think the vast majority wants to know the truth. I think the vast majority wants the beliefs they already have to be true. That fact is the whole basis of apologetics. Begin with the desired conclusion, and then work backward to the starting point.
but I appreciate you acknowledging atheism is a belief!
I did no such thing. It's not. It is a rejection of a claim. Your faux cheerful and cordial response is pretense covering up your childish attempt to put words in my mouth. I find few things more disrespectful than that.
And learn to use the quote feature.