All Christians should support the separation of church and state.
Debate Rounds (5)
It simply means that Government will have a hands off approach to religion, and that government will not establish a national religion. (http://www.pbs.org...) Basically it means, "Hey, government, leave religion alone. Neither force anyone to worship in a specific way, nor should you prohibit anyone from worshiping how they want."
1: I was being compassionate when debating you, because I inferred that you can't spell, you seemed like a decent person, and I thought, okay, give this guy a break. Debate him at his level.
2: I said in my original statement that Intelligence has been likened to a game of chess and I do not intend to lose one round. That is still the case; however, when I read your argument to my original opening, as I said before, I was assuming that you were a decent person with a very somewhat limited education that I should show mercy to, and maybe the whole "Intelligence is chess" argument didn't apply to this particular situation. I see that I was wrong in assuming that. Allow me to continue to blast holes into your argument one by one in each of your previous posts and each future post. It will happen if you are not civil from this point on.
3: As mentioned in point 2, I was civil in my first post to you; you were anything but civil in your post to me. I will remain civil from this point on, will you?
4: You continue to call Christians "chritians." Let me go on the record and say now, I am a Christian, not a "chritian", whatever that is. You assume I am talking about segregation, therefore accusing me of being a racist, do I read you correctly? In no way am I a racist. You say it is impunity to even mention something, but you do not specify what. Why don't you go research the definition of impunity and you'll find out some interesting stuff.
5: At the very end of your argument, you say, "my stand still remains, chritians should not allow I repeat, should not allow such because it will weigh down the powers of our government". Oh, no! Let us please not weigh down the powers of our government, whatever we do!! Am I being ironic, or were you? I thought that you said at the beginning of your argument that our government is the greatest purveyor of violence.
But please, continue to explain why you are the leader in this argument. Or, step up and debate me civilly, as I attempted to do when I read your reply to my first post. Either way, if you continue to behave uncivilly, I will report this argument, for reasons that I haven't even begun to explain.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Buckethead31594 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||3|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro didn't seem to provide any substantial form of argument.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.