Wait... you can stretch your imagination around a sentient truck that transforms into a massive war-robot or a kid who can summon magical powers with a stick and some Latin-esque phrases... but can't stretch it around deities or their opposite?

I can understand having a personal dislike of religion, or even being vehemently opposed to the concept of deities. I can see how a modern, rational person of healthy skepticism can adhere to a firm belief in a secular universe. I can even see rationality becoming almost dogmatic in the face of world that contains religious fundamentalists of every ilk.

I can't understand why a rational person, who I know has an healthy and active imagination, being able to put those things aside for the sake of a funny little word game where everyone tries to come up with the best arguments why one fictional/literary/celebrity personality would win in a barfight with another.

I think we ALL assume what folks presuppose. It's part of communications that a common language and meaning be inferred in everything we say. I choose to assume my friend Yags is making a funny statement about the popularity of Oprah and Martha when he puts them in the same league with Jesus and Beelzebub. I presume, because he's been doing this for a looooong time, that every one of the WWWIAF questions is designed with entertainment in mind, despite any mention of deities. If an when Yags decides to change that and take a soapbox for any of the personalities mentioned I'll revisit my assumption.

Pope Yagathai, First Scion of the Church of Oprah... I like this.