You are hopeless.<quoted text>
Don't throw your toys out of the pram when you cannot think of rebuttals. Do you really want to reduce yourself to Barefoot's level?
This is like saying "the presence of a head on a side of a coin doesn't make it either a head or a tail".
Of course it does. A side of a coin with a head on it becomes heads. Likewise, pleading guilty (positive) or not-guilty (negative) results in either a positive or negative plea.
A light is either on or off; it cannot be both which your logic implies.
Of course it makes no difference as off and not on still mean the same thing - that the lights are off - which in turn is a negative claim. The point is, however, that if we apply your logic to any case - be it foot size, atheism, court cases, light switches - positive and negative are to be mixed into one.
That is what you are doing with atheism. That is what we must therefore do to everything.
Then a switched-on light is also switched-off.
A heads side of a coin is also tails.
Innocence is also guilt.
According to your reasoning:
"The light is off" is a negative claim.
"The light is not off" is a positive claim.
That is absurd on its face, and you do not have the intellect to grasp the argument.