The Instigator
cho123
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Philocat
Con (against)
Winning
62 Points

Atheists Are Evil

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 11 votes the winner is...
Philocat
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/5/2015 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,254 times Debate No: 67834
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (11)

 

cho123

Pro

The word atheist comes from privative a and theos(God), therefore "godless".
God is good. Atheist is "goodless", ergo atheist is evil.
Philocat

Con

I will be arguing that atheists are not necessarily evil. Of course, many are evil but they are not automatically evil by virtue of their atheism.

As my opponent is making the positive claim (that atheists are evil), the burden of proof is on him to prove, a priori or a posteriori, that atheists are evil. All I need to do is refute his claims.

My opponents argument is a poor one I am afraid to say; it is formed upon a misunderstanding of language.

When one asserts 'God is good', they are not saying that God is equivalent to good, they are saying that God has the property of being good. Obviously the latter is a bit of a mouthful, hence the simplification to 'God is good'. It does not actually mean that God is equivalent to good.

For example, if I state:

'John is kind'

I am stating that John has the property of being kind. I am not stating that 'John' is equivalent to 'kind'.

Reductio ad absurdum, using the same logic as your argument:

'John is kind, Sarah is not John, ergo Sarah is unkind'

Of course, this is not logically sound.




As I have refuted my opponent's argument, he can either defend it or create another argument in favour of the proposition that atheists are evil.

Over to you!
Debate Round No. 1
cho123

Pro

God is equivalent to good.
God is the Holy Trinity.
Trees are good.
Therefore, God is equivalent to good.
Philocat

Con

Right, so you DO believe that God is equivalent to good?

According to that logic, to say something is good is to say that it is God.
This would mean that saying 'Cake is good' is equivalent to saying 'Cake is God', which is nonsensical.

Furthermore, if good is equivalent to God then everything that isn't God, isn't good. I am not God; does that make me not good?
My opponent is not God, does that mean he is not good?

Therefore, God cannot be equivalent to God.
Debate Round No. 2
cho123

Pro

You're right! If you're not God, then you are not good. Therefore, you are evil.
Gays are also evil. If gays are evil, that means you're gay.
Therefore everything that is not God is evil and gay.
But God is everything, so God is equivalent to everything, except evil and gay, because he is good.
Philocat

Con

Well, my opponent appears to have inadvertently admitted that he is an evil homosexual...

Asides from this, let us take a look at his logic. If he is correct in saying that if you are not God, then you are evil, then this would mean that St. Mary, St. Paul, Mohammad, Moses and all the other leading religious figures were evil. Taking into account that my opponent is religious, then he seems to be inconsistent.
More to the point, theists as well as atheists are not God so, according to Pro's logic, they are all evil as well. If this is the case then there would not be any point in phrasing the debate title in such a way as to imply that atheists are evil because of their atheism.

Furthermore, if everyone who is not God is evil, and everyone who is evil is gay, then everyone who is not God (i.e every human) is gay. Apart from the fact that around 95% (1) of the world are NOT gay, having a 100% homosexual population would invariably mean that the human race would have become extinct thousands of years ago.

I'm coming to the conclusion that my opponent is not being serious about this debate; as what he is saying is so ludicrously absurd.

(1) http://www.gallup.com...
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by YassineB 2 years ago
YassineB
@ cho123
Aren't supposed to be jewish?
Posted by YassineB 2 years ago
YassineB
@ cho123
Aren't supposed to be jewish?
Posted by Theunkown 2 years ago
Theunkown
The stupid...it hurts (hey he just called me evil for no valid reason).
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Codedlogic 2 years ago
Codedlogic
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Whew, what a close debate! I mean, pro really almost had me there. Especially the part about the trees. But unfortunately, Con decided to use reason and logic. Dirty little tools of the trade.
Vote Placed by Hylian_3000 2 years ago
Hylian_3000
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: It seems like Pro was not going for a very serious debate... He never did say that it was to be a troll debate or not a serious debate. S&G: No major spelling or grammar errors. Arguments: Pro mostly had lyrical and poetic arguments, which is nice and all. However, they weren't as convincing as Con's, which were serious and made good points. Also, Pro was a bit off topic with his arguments as well. In result, Con wins arguments. Sources: Con was the only one to utilize sources.
Vote Placed by warren42 2 years ago
warren42
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro was trolling.
Vote Placed by volcan 2 years ago
volcan
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: pros argument were unrelated to that subjects
Vote Placed by Theunkown 2 years ago
Theunkown
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Need I say anything?!
Vote Placed by The_Gatherer 2 years ago
The_Gatherer
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Con actually made a convincing case and completely proved Pro's argument to be illogical. Pro is very clearly a troll who simply wastes people's time in fake debates.
Vote Placed by YaHey 2 years ago
YaHey
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Though it seems obvious that Pro did not intend to have a serious debate, and elected to instead make ludicrous arguments for, what I believe, humor. While this is fine and well, nowhere did Pro indicate that this would be a troll debate. Thus, Pro was deceptive and loses conduct points. Arguments: Pro offerred one argument, that the parts of the term atheism means that atheism is necessarily evil. Con showed that this was an incorrect argument as God cannot be equivalent to good and the religion that Pro believes in remain consistent. Sources: Pro stated that the entire human population was gay, offerring no source for this statement. Con then fact-checked this assertion with an actual source.
Vote Placed by NoMagic 2 years ago
NoMagic
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro is a feather in the cap of theism.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Basically a forfeiture
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
cho123PhilocatTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: pro contradicts himself in that everyone who's not God is evil--including theists, not just atheists. Con also points out the craziness of pro's arguments.