The one I hear (and use) a lot is unbelievable: too dubious or improbable to be believed.
The outcome of a sports contest; the action of a person or persons; a comment someone makes; a new rule by the government; the cost of gasoline; the amount of money political candidates spend on campaigns; and on and on...
Unbelievable = unfair?
At some point in recent history, Irish (one can assume) atheists took umbrage over the fact that a religious oath is required to be a judge or President of the Republic.
What is unbelievable about that? The President of the United States is sworn in with a hand on a Bible.
Let's say for the sake of argument that an atheist is elected President. Do they make a big deal about having to place their hand on a Bible or do they just do it and move on. After all, an atheist doesn't believe in any god; take the oath, ignore the symbolism; no one the wiser; the oath-taker doesn't care anyway. Right?
Atheists rail against overt demonstrations of religious faith in the public square. But really, what is the problem? This is America. Our constitution bars establishment of a state religion. If the atheists play along who gets hurt? Christians are happy because we get to worship our God; atheists (should be) happy because they tolerate the intrusion of what they believe is ridiculous faith-based ceremony, and then do what they want to do anyway.
Unless there is a sliver of doubt among atheists that teases them with the thought, 'What if there is a god? As unbelievable as I think the whole God thing is, perhaps if I tempt fate too often I might suffer some unknown, and unpleasant fate.'
No, not that kind of punishment (image by D. Geister)
I can hear the outcry now.
What do you think?