The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

A Christian Should Vote Conservatively

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/26/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 796 times Debate No: 21527
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




A Christian should vote for the Conservative candidate because the views held by Conservatives are Bible-based and gives power to the people who try to follow God and freedom from a government that is sinful and represses people's rights.


I am not sure if this round is just for acceptance or construction, I am going to go with construction, since my opponent seemed to have built a small case and since this debate is only 3 rounds it would seem odd to debate for only two.

So I accept my opponent's challenge.

I reject this resolution since it supposes that every christian is only going to have Christian beliefs, and it completly avoids the constituation (I am assuming my opponent is talking about the United States, for obvious reasons).

Contention I: The United States was founded on a multi-party system. This may seem odd as we have deterred down to just three parties, Democrat, Liberal, and Republican, but it is completely relevant. My opponent is supposing that you should not be allowed to vote another party because of your religion. What we must see is this is completely false. A Christian has the right to vote for whatever party they wish, while they may with agree the Christian religion it may not be everything they believe. What I mean is a Christian maybe believe that Jesus is god's son and he came back from the dead, but they also may not believe with the politician's foreign policy or tax beliefs. The many party's of the american system allow for more than just religion. This bringing me to my second contention.

Contention II: The United States was founded on freedom of religion, and separation of church and state. This is only really relevant in theory, but it should still be considered since we are talking about the United States' government system and therefore we must look to the constitution. In the constitution it says that there must be a freedom of speech, 1) you get to choose your religion and 2) the party you vote for, not 1) you choose the religion and that gives you what party you vote for. The constitution also says separation of church and state, this means that the nominees ideals shouldn't just be from their religion. This means that the nature of the resolution alone contradicts the United States' constitution, and for that we must reject it.

Contention III: The resolutin avoids th social contract according to John Locke. John Locke's social contract says that each many has a right to life, liberty, and possions. My opponent by affirming the resolution is removing liberty from chirsitans and making them vote for a prisedent they may not like. I don't feel it is neccesary to explain further.

My opponent's case:

I will attack my opponent's case as follows:

1)Voting for a conservative canidate grants power to christians. ("Conservatives are Bible-based and gives power to the people who try to follow God").
2)Protects people (of god) from a sinful government.

In my opponent's case he completly avoids the constitution (and the social contract). My attacks are as follows:

1) This is an a complete oboition to the constitution, since it says sepration of chruch and state. The prisedent would simply be avoiding this by creating laws that were just for the chrisitans and by doing this they are fundemantal removing the rights of every indidivdual in America that does not believe in the Christian god. For this reason we must reject this reason for affirming the resolution, since it violates America.

This really relates back to my 1st contention about how they make like the christian values in a prisedent but thy may not like their forigen policy.

We must reject this resolution as it removes liberty from Christans, and it creates an America that goes against everything our founding fathers fought for.

Sorry for the delay in my posting, I lost internet connection while typing.
Debate Round No. 1


Contention 1: It is true that you can vote for anyone you want as a Christian but that doesn't make it morally right. You can vote for a Nazi and I believe that would be a sin. If the government supports killing of innocents, gay rights and evolution being taught in the school, that would go against the beliefs in the Bible.

Contention 2: Separation of Church and State meant when originally written that you can't have a government church. Thomas Jefferson put it in there because the Dansbury Baptists didn't want to be overthrown by a government denomination.

Contention 3: God also wants you to obey him and we are to be living sacrifices to him and we should vote the way Jesus would vote.


I feel this debate has become spoiled as my opponent has taken a completly biased side of the resolution, favoring that his god is the only god and the most important god (again avoiding the U.S. constitution). This should undoubtly effect the voting into the con direction, but for the time being I will still attack my opponent's attacks.

Contention 1: Life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness, those three things are granted to you by the United States constitution. My opponent brings up that voting Nazi party would be wrong, I am not advocating we vote for the Nazi party, but what I am advocating for is that people get to choose weather they want to vote for it or not. My opponent says this would be a sin, but by who? The bible. The constitution which governs this country says the inidividual citizen of have the right to liberty, and free choice of such, which my opponents wishes to remove. He says that gay rights and evolution being taught in school is againsted the bible, but this is irrelavent since it comes down to liberty.

Contention 2: I am going to leave this alone (not forfeit it) since me and my opponent will never come to a conclusion since neither of us have meet or spoken with Thomas Jefferson so we cannot put forth the reason that this was put in there.

Contention 3: "we should vote the way Jesus would vote." again my opponent is suggesting we give the life for Jesus, and that is every Christians goal, and again I argue for liberty that liberty must exist to aid the United States constitution. To this he is saying that the only possible way Jesus would vote is conservatie but yet he says that gay rights are an abontion and that is upheld in Christian values, but the bible says that we should love everyone including the gays. "For God so loved the WORLD that he gave his one and only Son,[a] that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life.". This may not be the only way Jeus would have voted if he truly was god's son, since god loved the entire world including the gays, if they believed in Jesus. So I present the argument that some Christin have the right to believe that the conservative way is not the way of Jesus and the way of god.
Debate Round No. 2


God_Soldier forfeited this round.


milktea forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by larztheloser 6 years ago
Lol at "we should vote the way Jesus would vote." I find the idea of Jesus giving presidential endorsements incredibly funny.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 6 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Why