I am looking for a magisterial rebuttal, that I can cite in the future, to this conundrum that I often encounter in the truth-seeking process. Prior to a series of recent experiences, I would have assumed that 'please provide evidence for your claim that X is true' is a matter near and dear to the members of 'the rationalist community'. Certain recent events have shown that to not be the case. Does anyone have any insights to offer?
An example of this issue ...
Person A: X is true!
Me; I see no reason to believe that X is true.
A: X is an empirical claim and X is true!
Me: Would you please provide evidence that X is true?
A: X is true!
Me: As you are claiming that X is true then you bear the burden of proof and are required to prove logic and evidence to support your claim.
A: No! X is true!
Me: You are violating a basic rule of logic.
A: No! And you are being an asshole!
Me: I refute your evidence-free claim with Hitchens's razor — "what can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence".
A: X is true!
Me: I refute your evidence-free claim and ridicule your your defiantly defective rational argumentation in persisting to make the claim. I bitch-slap you with Hitchens's razor!
A: You're making me sad.
Me: Neither your sadness nor any of your others feelings are evidence that X is true.
Does anyone have thoughts on this matter?