Rant time! I'm on the offensive here, so feel free to stand up and defend yourself here if I'm attacking your position.
Burden of Proof
Many times I hear people saying "don't ask me to prove you wrong." Which is a fair thing to say... but it's not always in response to people actually asking to be proven wrong.
I'm agnostic. I make no claim. I put no weight behind any of my arguments; they're all idle musings, random hypotheses. The most you'll get out of me is gut feeling, and "this is how I'd like it to be." But if pressured, I will NOT put any real support behind any specific assertion.
More than once I've been responded to with people trying to shove burden of proof on me (not here, thankfully). Trying to get me to provide evidence when the very heart of my position is that there IS no evidence*. These people are silly, thinking they don't have to defend their arguments. Hypocrites doing exactly what they accuse others of doing: circular logic claiming self evidence.
So let's get something straight: Burden of proof lies on those making a claim. Those saying "this is how it is." It doesn't matter WHAT the claim is, just so long as the claim is presented as a statement of fact. Atheism, theism, anything about the nature of the afterlife or supernatural, all of it. If you make a claim about it, just as if you claim knowledge or fact about anything, then you provide evidence**. Not anyone else. I don't care if your position is under the label "true" or "false," "right" or "wrong." It is not self evident***.
*Exceptions:
1) Religions that claim something empirical. That is something that can have evidence for or against it, proven right or wrong. IE, this dude at this period of time did this thing.
2) Contradictions. Logical incompatibilities within a religion (or other theory concerning the supernatural) can be used as evidence that it's wrong, or at least flawed. IE, invisible pink unicorns.
**Reasons you might not need to provide evidence:
1) Not claiming knowledge. Essentially your claim carries as much weight (honestly, even less) as the claim that the horse you bet on will win the race. IE, belief or hope.
2) Not claiming belief. This carries even less weight than #1, if that were possible. IE, idle musings.
***:
Invariably someone's going to counter this with a teapot. So I'll respond to it right now. There are some questions where the answer makes no practical difference. No matter your conclusion, your perception of the world is unchanged and you'll do nothing different. That's fine. However, while "may as well be false/true" is practically identical to "is false/true," it is not actually the same. It is a fallacy to jump from lack of knowledge -> knowledge. You can come to whatever conclusion you want, and thus claim belief, but you can never claim knowledge through this.