The Instigator
narmak
Pro (for)
Winning
17 Points
The Contender
RationalMadman
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points

Atheists are not evil

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 6 votes the winner is...
narmak
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/20/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,666 times Debate No: 28167
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (6)

 

narmak

Pro

alright so apparently to many religous people i am evil for being an athiest so i would like con to explain an try to prove that athiests are evil.

ok so 2 people have accepted and posted nothing this is the thrid tiem reposting
RationalMadman

Con

Evil: Not a theist.

Atheist: A disbeliever in god.

Theist: A believer in god.
Debate Round No. 1
narmak

Pro

e"vil
/ˈēvəl/
Adjective
Profoundly immoral and malevolent.
Noun
Profound immorality, wickedness, and depravity,

Above is the definition of evil you do not create your own.

1) by your definition hitler is not evil sure he killed millions but he believed in god so hes not evil????? by your defnition any religous man could walk down the stree and kill at will and not be consdered evil because he bleives. The ac of killling without a valid reason is evil

2) you cannot use god to prove somthing evil or not as you cannot prove the existance of god so to use him in an argument makes no sense at all.

3) Newborn babies have no beliefs does ths also make babies evil?

4) a theist does good because that is what he is told to do an athiest does good because he wants to. a theist is motivated to do good because he does not want to go to hell and wants to enter heaven when he dies which is greedy. an athiest doesnt do good expecting a reward.

If an athiest is good its because he wants to be if a theist is good it is because hes afraid not to be
RationalMadman

Con

Everyone is evil.

Theists are evil because they believe in only one god and not others, DIRTY COWARDS!

Hitler only believed in one god DIRTY COWARD!
Debate Round No. 2
narmak

Pro

well it appears con is trolling and has yet to provide any proof
RationalMadman

Con

I have proven that almost everyone is evil because basically no-one believes in all forms of god (and if they do they are not atheist).

Thus, if we draw morality from God, atheists have no true source of it other than their feelings and if they feel the need to rape their one year old daughter, they might just do it (which most religious would say is evil). Thus, atheists are evil because of their tendency to lose all morality depending on how they feel (since emotions are their only true source of morality although perhaps law helps to reign them in a bit but even then only those who FEAR it, emotionally, will be able to have morality).
Debate Round No. 3
narmak

Pro

is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?
Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?
Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able, and willing?
Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing?
Then why call him God

1) Morality does not come from god it comes from man. We have stopped the death penalty here in canada but according to the bible it is ok to kill someone they have killed anyone. And again if we want you still suggest it comes fom god lemme ask you this god supposedly sent a flood to wipe out the population of earth that he deemed evil.Doesnt this show wrath which if im correct is a sin?

The sixth commandment is "Thou shalt not kill."1t God violated His own commandment in ordering the destruction of entire cities, just to allow the Jews to have a homeland in the Middle East. The Bible confirms that God ordered the killing of thousands of people. where are the morals here?

again morals do not come from god as if he does exist he is evil. and again the bible woman are not equal to men and yet todays society in most places women are equal to men care to explain that one?
RationalMadman

Con

The only god you opposed was the judeo-christian one.

There are many forms of god and wihtout god one's emotions are a very unreliable moral compass.

You have not at all shown it possible for an atheist to be good once.

Thanks and good night
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by devient.genie 4 years ago
devient.genie
THOUGHTS 5:19--Was standing up and publicly speaking out against lynchings and other cruel treatment of African Americans or other races during the early 20th century, was that as taboo as standing up and speaking out for reason and the truth which happen to be contradictions to religious views in the 21st century. Every human is African :)

Bigotry 11:14--Atheist is a bogus word. There is No word for someone who does Not believe in astrology or horoscopes, there is Not a name for someone who doesnt believe leprechauns are at the end of rainbows, there is Not a name for a person who does not believe there is a tea pot orbiting the andromeda galaxy. Why is there a name for someone who does Not believe the reason for everything is a homophobe :)

GrowUp 16:1--The best words for "nonbelievers" in leprechauns at the end of rainbows, are sane and logical, the same words should be used for those who are nonbelievers that the reason for everything rested on the 7th day and can convict you of thought crimes :)

QUESTIONS 7:6--Why is it that people who think Elvis or Tupac are alive, we consider delusional, yet people who think that the reason for everything is admittidely jeallous and can convict you of thought crimes, those people somehow posess moral excellence? :)

CaptainObvious 2:3--Science cannot prove or disprove a slave supporting sexist who is admittingly jealous and can convict you of thought crimes, anymore than science can prove leprechauns at the end of rainbows. Those things seems a bit far fetched for a thinking person and are therefore called statistical improbabilities amongst not only the most brilliant minds of today, but a growing number of people everywhere :)

LOVE 8:14--What does a stalker do, that the main character in the holy binky does?....They put you on a pedestal, but then once they're rejected, its anger, and rage :)

Which is more effective, fortune cookies, rain dances, horoscopes or prayers? :)
Posted by narmak 4 years ago
narmak
the act of killing is evil so the fact that god kills makes him evil and again you cannot use god to prove somthing evil as 1 you cant prove his existance 2 if he does exist he is evil himself
Posted by RationalMadman 4 years ago
RationalMadman
still an idiot xoxo
Posted by tennis47 4 years ago
tennis47
Not anymore, sucker.
Posted by RationalMadman 4 years ago
RationalMadman
Tennis47 is an idiot... But because of this idiot I am winning...
Posted by narmak 4 years ago
narmak
con again didnt provide any proof he just said not believing in gods makes you evil which again makes no sense at all
Posted by andrewkletzien 4 years ago
andrewkletzien
This just reminded me of what I always get as an atheist: "If you don't repent, you're going to hell!" Have theists gotten to the point that they are so vitriolic that they fail to realize that saying "You're going to hell" to an atheist is like me telling you that Santa is going to give you coal in your stocking this year for Christmas. Or that the Tooth fairy isn't going to give you money for your tooth if you don't behave in church! And then the claim that they "have read our beliefs" and "know what we believe" enough to have an intelligent and informed debate. And clearly, they haven't the slightest clue about atheism in the first place because of their childhood or refusal to expose themselves to new information in adulthood. As JK Rowling said at her Harvard Commencement speech, "There is an expiration date on blaming your parents for everything. When you're old enough to get behind the wheel, responsibility lies with you."
Posted by narmak 4 years ago
narmak
a homeless christian and an athiest are down by a lake when an expert fisherman coes down and offers to teach them to fish. the atheist accpets and says thank you the christian says there is no need god will help me. 3 days later the christian dies praying for a fish while the athiest enjoys his meals.
Posted by GeorgiaAshley 4 years ago
GeorgiaAshley
An atheist was walking in the woods when he came across a ferocious bear.
The bear pounced on him and he was soon laying on the ground with the bear on top of him with its jaws open.
He looked up to the sky in desperation and screamed "Please god help me"!
A voice boomed down to him from the sky "Why my friend do you ask for my help when all your life you have dish graced me and not believed in me then, in this time you are in need of help, you call upon me, you are not even a christian". Replied God.

The man wailed back "Please if you don't make me a christian make the bear a christian at least"!

God replied with an abrupt "If you wish".

Then as if by magic, the bear released its grip on the man and pressed its two front pays together in a prayer and said the following words " Thank you dear God for the meal I am about to receive, Amen".
Posted by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
You obviously want Secondguy to argue first. So he should be "Pro," and you should be "Con," and you should explicitly give him the burden of proof, and, since he argues first, he shouldn't get to argue in the final round.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by tennis47 4 years ago
tennis47
narmakRationalMadmanTied
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:34 
Reasons for voting decision: Everybody's evil one way or the other, but RationalMadman's arguments were weak.
Vote Placed by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
narmakRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:25 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter tennis47.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
narmakRationalMadmanTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con trolled the debate, making assertions unsupported by rational arguments or facts. Spiking a legitimate debate topic is a conduct violation. Definitions cannot be added after the challenge is posted. If the challenger does not give a definition, it is the ordinary dictionary definition that best fits the context.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 4 years ago
johnlubba
narmakRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con won it by claimig, everybody is evil. I see no conclusive rebuttal to this obvious statement. Infact Pro called out Con for trolling, when Con provided an answer of quality rather than quantity.
Vote Placed by wiploc 4 years ago
wiploc
narmakRationalMadmanTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Trolling.
Vote Placed by andrewkletzien 4 years ago
andrewkletzien
narmakRationalMadmanTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Sad to see such an important and interesting debate turned into what it did, but either way I cast my votes as such. In the remembrance of Hitchens, and to shed some light on this subject: Name me one intrinsically evil action or statement that a non-believer could make but a believer could not? (I have yet to receive a proper answer). Then, ask yourself of one evil action or statement that could only be taken by a believer (through divine warrant) and not a non-believer. You have already thought of one, if not several.