A common dilemma faced with many atheists forced to defend their system of belief is the burden of proof that God does not exist. However, to the benefit of the atheist, this onus can be placed solely on the shoulders of the believer. This is only logical owing to the fact that rather than being a belief that something is not so, (e. g. the existence that a deity does not exist) the atheist belief by definition is lack of belief in something.
This being the case, the only party requiring proof is the believer, seeing as the believer is the only one holding a belief. The only way one can defend a belief is if one has a belief to begin with. Thus, rather than the believer asking the non-believer why he/she does not believe in a deity, the non-believer should be asking the believer why they do believe in said deity.
Summarily...
- You don't have to defend what you don't believe in.
- You do have to defend what you do believe in.