The last reply assumes equivalence of rhetorical status for religionists and atheists. Such equivalence is without foundation. Religionists argue that "X is the case" where X is their particular belief system, whereas atheists make no such claim, despite the nonsense about "an atheist's belief in God's non-existence", which some believers cling to in order to support their "equivalence".

As atheists see it, believers go even further into "the realms of fantasy" when they push for the "truth" of their particular system relative to that of other believers. Some fancy moves by the "all the same God-ists" are transparently ad hoc intellectualisms doomed to insignificance because they ignore the primary social/tribal function of religion for the less intellectual.