"According to rationalists, anything that cannot be proven does not exist. Therefore, since God's existence has not been proven, he too does not exist. I want to ask them: Has it been proven that God does not exist? So, why are you so eager to believe that God does not exist? " -- This is a poor argument. There is a concept called burden of proof, which always lies with the one making a claim. Thus, if I claim that there is a five headed green monster that feeds on the flesh of the living in the deepest forests of the Amazon, I have to prove it exists. Similarly, if someone claims God exists, the burden of proof lies with that person to first prove that, since they introduce the concept (still waiting on that one). Then, once it has been proven, the burden shifts to the rationalist who then has to prove God does not exist.
Religion and science seek to achieve the same goal - to understand why are we here, how are we here, how did we get here etc. They take two completely different approaches, and people choose to believe what they want. At least Togadia has the right perspective on Karunanidhi... He is an atheist, so why would he say anything different? When religious people claim god is great, why cant an atheist profess his faith (or lack thereof)?
