The Instigator
Passionate_Fighter
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Rosalie
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Atheists believe that raping a baby girl is okay - since God doesn't exist - whatever!

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 4 votes the winner is...
Rosalie
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/30/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,312 times Debate No: 84406
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (36)
Votes (4)

 

Passionate_Fighter

Pro

I am going to tear these stupid atheism and evolution to pieces!

According to atheists, they think to themselves:
"Since God doesn't exist, it's only in our mind that we are alive!
So a baby girl being raped by a brutal rapist should not be a problem, it's only in our mind!

(They also think,)
It is okay to watch porn! It is only in the mind that it is wrong!
(But how would they feel if their mother, sister or their own daughter were in that porn scene their watching? But it's all good right? it's oookay!)

(In addition they think,)
We evolved,
(But, how can you teach that "THIS IS HOW THIS PUZZLE GOT CONNECTED!" when they can't connect the puzzle themselves? Or is the WIND (chance) better in fitting puzzles than HUMANS?)"

Stop suppressing the truth atheists, God exists! :-)
Amen!

I say it again, how I wish this fairytale of evolution was true - for then I would also be a fairy.
Rosalie

Con

Thank you Pro for starting this debate.

Since no definitions were given, I will provide some.

Atheist- a person who disbelieves or lacks belief in the existence of God or gods.
(https://www.google.com...)

Believe- accept (something) as true; feel sure of the truth of.
(https://www.google.com...)

Rape- : unlawful sexual activity and usually sexual intercourse carried out forcibly or under threat of injury against the will usually of a female or with a person who is beneath a certain age or incapable of valid consent — compare sexual assault, statutory rape. (https://www.google.com...)

In order for Pro to win this debate he must prove that every Athesit believes that raping a child is okay. He must show factual evidence. Good luck.



Debate Round No. 1
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

(Thank you for accepting this challenge con, good luck!)

Rosalie (Con):
"In order for Pro to win this debate, he must prove that every atheist believes that raping a child is okay. He must show factual evidence. Good luck."

For example (an refutable example of an actual thing that ma occur):

Christian: Do you believe in God?
Atheist: Not at all!

Christian: What do you believe in then?
Atheist: Evolution!

Christian: So that would mean we (humans) are only materials out of chance, are we?
Atheist: Yes, there is no other explanation.

Christian: Okay, since with your perception of that we are materials out of chance, then you should think that it is only in our mind that we are alive?
Atheist: Yes, it's only in our mind.

Christian: So do you think that it's only in our mind that a rape is wrong?
Atheist: Since we are only materials out of chance, thinking that something is right or wrong is only in our brain and, yes - we think rape is wrong. But that is still only in our brain that rape is wrong.

Christian: It is not only in our mind that a rape is wrong, it is 'really' wrong!

.". Proven!
Rosalie

Con

Pro so far has failed to uphold their Bop. Instead, they have made up their own scenario as proof. Their scenario is something they belive to be true. I will say it again, in order to win this debate, Pro must prove that every living Atheist believes it's okay to rape a child.

I will extend this round in hopes for something to argue against.
Debate Round No. 2
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

Everyone is foolishly becoming converted to being an atheist every single day - so how do you expect me to cover all of these atheists up?

Your terms for me to win this debate are impossible, may you please give me reasonable terms for me to win.
Rosalie

Con

Pro claims "Everyone is foolishly becoming converted to being an atheist every single day". This is a assumption. For this statement to be true, Pro must provide proof, which they haven't.

Again, the resolution invovles the word "Athesists" which refers to a group of people. My opponent is claiming that *all* Atheist believe in raping babies. Pro has to BOP to prove that *all* Athesist believe this, which they haven't done yet. For now, I have nothing to argue.
Debate Round No. 3
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

It is easiest for me to count all the grains of sand in the world than it is for me to win this debate with those terms.

Check, our debate rounds are about to be no more, goodness me, how old are you?
Rosalie

Con

My opponent claims that I'm being unreasonable. Yet, they have to BoP to show us, and convince us that *ALL* Atheists believe in raping babies. All my opponent has done is made arguments based off of assumption.

The problem with the resolution is that my opponent used the word "Atheists" which refers to a *group* of people. In order for him/her to win, they had to prove that *ALL* Atheists believe in raping babies.

I really have nothing to argue or refute since my opponent has not given me a valid argument. But I will make a case here.

The topic is "Atheists believe that raping a baby girl is okay - since God doesn't exist - whatever!"
I will be arguing that this belief has to do with moral belifs.
[1] Moral Rules- of, relating to, or concerned with the principles or rules of right conduct or the distinction between right and wrong; ethical: moral attitudes. 2. expressing or conveying truths or counsel as to right conduct, as a speaker or a literary work.
Lets note that many beliefs come from a moral standpoint, and or how one was raised.
[2]

What constitutes "mature morality" is a subject of great controversy. Each society develops its own set of norms and standards for acceptable behavior, leading many to say that morality is entirely culturally conditioned. Does this mean there are no universal truths, no cross-cultural standards for human behavior? The debate over this question fuels the critiques of many moral development theories. Kohlberg's six stages of moral development, for example, have been criticized for elevating Western, urban, intellectual (upper class) understandings of morality, while discrediting rural, tribal, working class, or Eastern moral understandings. (See Kohlberg's theory of moral reasoning.) Feminists have pointed out potential sexist elements in moral development theories devised by male researchers using male subjects only (such as Kohlberg's early work). Because women's experience in the world is different from men's (in every culture), it would stand to reason that women's moral development might differ from men's, perhaps in significant ways.

Definitions of what is or is not moral are currently in a state of upheaval within individual societies as well as, at least, in the Western world. Controversies rage over the morality of warfare (especially nuclear), ecological conservation, genetic research and manipulation, alternative fertility and childbearing methods, abortion, sexuality, pornography, drug use, euthanasia, racism, sexism, and human rights issues, among others. Determining the limits of moral behavior becomes increasingly difficult as human capabilities, choices, and responsibilities proliferate with advances in technology and scientific knowledge. For example, prenatal testing techniques that determine birth defects in utero force parents to make new moral choices about whether to birth a child. Other examples of recently created moral questions abound in modern-day society.

STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT

  • Stage 1 = infancy—the child's only sense of right and wrong is what feels good or bad;
  • Stage 2 = toddler years—the child learns "right" and "wrong" from what she or he is told by others;
  • Stage 3 = preschool years—the child begins to internalize family values as his or her own, and begins to perceive the consequences of his or her behavior;
  • Stage 4 = ages 7-10 years—the child begins to question the infallibility of parents, teachers, and other adults, and develops a strong sense of "should" and "should not"
  • Stage 5 = preteen and teenage years—peers, rather than adults, become of ultimate importance to the child, who begins to try on different values systems to see which fits best; teens also become more aware of and concerned with the larger society, and begin to reason more abstractly about "right" and "wrong."


Read more: Moral Development - STAGES OF MORAL DEVELOPMENT - Lawrence Kohlberg, Mean Example, Morality, and Social - JRank Articles http://psychology.jrank.org...


As we can see, not all peoples morals develop from the bible. We are simply raised to know right from rong, and we learn from our past mistakes.
So, to say that raping a baby is moral, because one does not blive in the bible is false.
Sources:
Debate Round No. 4
Passionate_Fighter

Pro

Passionate_Fighter forfeited this round.
Rosalie

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 5
36 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by matt8800 1 year ago
matt8800
This is a great example of how people can become emotional about their opinions despite the fact there is no foundation for the belief.
Posted by Midnight1131 1 year ago
Midnight1131
I'm crying, this is hilarious.
Posted by Tashasays 1 year ago
Tashasays
One of the funniest debates I've seen. I like the part where pro complains about how he can't win. Hilarious.
Posted by TheFlyingPham 1 year ago
TheFlyingPham
Con didn't really have anything to argue lol, she didn't need to since pro had no platform
Posted by Jerry947 1 year ago
Jerry947
Even though Pro practically handed the win over to Con...Con's arguments weren't good at all. The part about morality was just dreadful to read. I don't understand why atheists/agnostics get sucked into these type of arguments.
Posted by Reformist 1 year ago
Reformist
So lets say if God tells me to murder people.......

"your own full brother, or your son or daughter, or your beloved wife, or you intimate friend, entices you secretly to serve other gods, whom you and your fathers have not known, gods of any other nations, near at hand or far away, from one end of the earth to the other: do not yield to him or listen to him, nor look with pity upon him, to spare or shield him, but kill him. Your hand shall be the first raised to slay him; the rest of the people shall join in with you. You shall stone him to death, because he sought to lead you astray from the Lord, your God, who brought you out of the land of Egypt, that place of slavery. And all Israel, hearing of this, shall fear and never do such evil as this in your midst."(Deuteronomy 13:7-12 NAB)

That's okay though! God said to do it....

Okay who here doesn't believe in god? we have to murder you!
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 1 year ago
WhineyMagiciann5
Just reread last comment. Cant decide what is worse, being unable to type on my phone or dealing with my laptop before it get back from being fixed
Posted by WhineyMagiciann5 1 year ago
WhineyMagiciann5
XD. This i amazing comedy, i seriously jope that this guy reveals it is all just a joke or im going to get even more dissapointed in humanity. Im already a misanthrope do that is saying something!
Posted by TheFlyingPham 1 year ago
TheFlyingPham
Rosalie my ex goes to your school, we are still friends just long distance didn't work.
Posted by Rosalie 1 year ago
Rosalie
Lol, exactly.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Unbelievable.Time 1 year ago
Unbelievable.Time
Passionate_FighterRosalieTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by matt8800 1 year ago
matt8800
Passionate_FighterRosalieTied
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: Pro was unable to prove the totally unsubstantiated argument that atheists believe raping a baby girl is ok.
Vote Placed by TheResistance 1 year ago
TheResistance
Passionate_FighterRosalieTied
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: FF; Pro didn't really put up evidence or facts. Con was in the end having all of her arguments/rebuttals standing.
Vote Placed by Forever23 1 year ago
Forever23
Passionate_FighterRosalieTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: FF by pro