I want you to use a bit of that rational logic that Atheists are apparently so famous for, and follow the logic to its inevitable conclusion.
Lets say that God does eliminate the problems you've listed. Then what? Surely, choking and placement of internal organs aren't the only problems. Perhaps, you'd make out a list of other problems for God to fix, and let's say he does fix them for you. At some point, you'd get to the end of the list and there would be no more problems for humans at all.
-_- I am not asking for everything to be fixed, just pointing out basic flaws in human biology that would have been easy to prevent if humans were designed. Eyes exist in nature without blind spots like ours have, so why would Yahweh give an octopus an eye designed better than a human eye? Why is how the human eye works so inherently flawed when supposedly the same designer worked on both eyes? Two separate tubes for eating and breathing would fit fine in our bodies, and if not that, why not give use the capacity to freely breathe while eating, like snakes can? If these errors were universal, they would make more sense as a design error perpetuated by the same designer, but they aren't, so what gives?
Most problems faced by our species have nothing to do with these biological errors, but rather are situations we have inflicted upon ourselves, so humans would still have plenty of conflict even if these were fixed. But I find it troubling that you believe in a creator that could have fixed these issues, and chose not to on a whim.
But, since a great deal of the world's problems involve people causing problems for one another, you'd end up with no one being able to cause problems anymore, and then where does that leave you?
As long as people had free will, they could cause problems for each other. For example, it would still be possible to strangle a snake, despite the fact that the only way they can choke is by swallowing something ridiculously huge for their size whole.
People unable to make any choice except the right choice, in every circumstance and situation. Congratulations on turning the human race into robots just because you feel indignant that God may expect you to actually confront, challenge, and solve problems rather than complain about them.
-_- it is impossible for a person to ensure that they will not choke, even if they chew very well. This is because the epiglottis, which sections off the "breathing" part of the tube while swallowing, becomes worn out with age, and begins to fail. So you can do everything right, and still choke to death. Humans have plenty of conflict to work with without it being the soundness of our bodies.
One of the leading causes of choking in children is hot dogs, which just happens to be a favorite food for many children. Its cylindrical shape and rounded ends make it a perfect throat plug. This is scientifically verifiable, proven, and repeatable evidence, but that doesn't stop manufacturers, grocery stores, or fast food retailers from profiting off the food. Poor God gets all the blame while humans get all the profit.
This deity that supposedly designed people able to choke and die this way, even though it would have been so easy to avoid doing so. People would still choke to death sometimes, even if we all played it safe.
I don't get the impression that you care about choking. If I'm wrong about that, I'm fine to hear it, but at the moment it looks more like the only value you see in the argument is in how you can use it to make yourself feel better about your atheism.
I hate being an atheist and I have nearly choked to death on cheese before. Part of the string cheese got stuck in my throat as I was swallowing, so I almost breathed in a huge chunk of it. I had to hold my breath and carefully pull out the cheese by a thin strand by reaching into my own throat. So, yeah, I do care about choking, and a deity being an incompetent designer wouldn't make me believe in it any less, but it is so frequent that people argue that it is the "perfection" in nature that lends to it being designed, so I take issue with the logic behind that kind of argument. Designs made by the same designer generally aren't perfect, but they are consistent, and it is the additional lack of consistency in design choices that lead me to conclude that life on this planet probably isn't designed.
It's presented as an indictment against God rather than a genuine concern for people and that desire to smother any meaning or purpose behind learning and growing from the problems we face (rather than throwing a tantrum) will always stop you from appreciating just how petty the argument really is.
-_- to be fair, I only present it as an argument against one designer. Technically, if there were multiple ones, it wouldn't be an argument against that, assuming these multiple designers were imperfect and entirely separate beings.
Time scale more or less makes that unlikely, however. Guided evolution is perfectly plausible, but since there is no evidence for it, I don't personally believe in it.
So, my inevitable conclusion is that, were life on this planet designed, it would have been done by multiple designers, none of which were omniscient. Since there is no evidence for these hypothetical designers, however, I shall act as if they don't exist unless evidence arises that suggests otherwise.
