Don't kid yourself Jem, from the things you write it's doubtful you could point out your own ass. You're a theist, blindly submissively witlessly accepting extortionate claims of faith having no basis in reality, which is all that is needed to be a theist. You're a birther, rejecting the requisite legal evidence confirming eligibility in reality, as defined and required under law, which is all that is needed to be a birther. The sheer irony naturally escapes you.
Innocent victim, what the hell are you talking about, and no, why should I believe such tripe. No comeback...? obviously then, a reasoned response is not something you consider as a comeback. In reciprocation I'll give one answer to your one question : There is no sensible reason to believe it does. Well now that's some example of a theist's vanity. A peremptory haughty attitude which will troll like a crazy, only to turn on their own kind for doing the same. However, it's not going to be much of an argument that tries to show weakness in not agreeing with what are in the first place, a theist's utterly illogical and absurd assertions. Anytime you really do "..want to seriously, honestly, and openly discuss the issues".... let me know.
I think you are mistaking my placing of an argument, as your post above appears so to do, with those who just childishly make snarky remarks against it alone. Strange you should think my responding to illogical and faulty assertions is being partial and ignoring one side of the argument. But if that were the case , your argument above would be guilty of its own accusation.
"There is no sensible reason to believe it does." So all your reasons to believe are sensible? What's that you say Mr. Spock?