• Me - Hey, let's talk about consciousness!
• Others - No, prove God first
• Me - Hey, let's talk about morality!
• Others- No, prove God first
• Me - Hey, let's talk about evolution!
• Others - No, that doesn't prove God

I've coined the term The Straw God Fallacy to describe the behavior of rebutting a Christian's argument, by attacking a Christian's beliefs.

I don't argue religiously. If this were a Catholic forum, my discussions would take a Religious approach. But a Biblical approach is wasted on an atheist audience. I focus on making non-religious, scientific, and philosophical arguments. I present my responses in whatever way I think they are most likely to be received and agreed upon. I don't think I've ever made an argument on these forums, which require God's existance. If I have they are few and far between.

Labels are useful tools, but they must be used properly. People tend to see my label and not my arguments. They think that refuting my label, is a valid rebuttal to my arguments. For example, if you disagree with my arguments on subjective morality, you might be tempted to attack the Bible's morality, as if by default my argument is also refuted. Or if you disagree with my arguments on evolution, you might be tempted to attack Young Earth Creationism, as if by debunking it, my position is weakened.

The constant request for evidence of God is particularly interesting. As far as I'm concerned, God doesn't exist for the purposes of these discussions. Whatever my personal beliefs are outside these forum, shouldn't be inferred or supposed unless I use them in my arguments. I've even been asked emphatically for evidence of souls before, which is funny given that my denomination doesn't believe in souls.

Address my arguments, not my Christian label.