Yes, it’s quite amusing, this whole affair. 
Perhaps we can work with a similar issue to clear up matters. Suppose I say there’s a pastry in the fridge. I agree that I have to prove this claim. You’re saying that unless I do that you won’t believe that there’s a pastry in the fridge. Fair. Now you eat the pastry, come back to me and tell me that there’s no pastry in the fridge. I’m saying that unless you prove this I’m going to believe there is a pastry in the fridge. This is the ad ignorantiam fallacy. The most logical position is agnosticism (we don’t know … whether there is a God or not).
Negative utilitarianism touches a chord. It’s a sensible moral theory (aponia, re Epicurus).