Atheists do not need a god to be moral.
Debate Rounds (4)
This will be 4 rounds, the first one being an introduction and a greeting. I will be arguing that the topic in question is indeed true. We will have 72 hours to argue, and the voting period is five days. The arguments are limited to 8,000 characters. I look forward to our debate, and at the same time, my first debate on debate.org. Thank you, you may now present yourself.
Edit: Time for a clarification:
When I refer to being moral, I am saying that you commit good deeds of your own accord and having a sense of right and wrong. When I say atheists do not need a god to be moral, I am giving the argument that a belief in a god is not required for morals. Thanks to the comments for the advice. I'm sorry, but I am not very skilled at debating nor am I experienced in this field.
I have accepted your request on a basis of a challenge so I wish to assert now that I share your beliefs so some of my arguments may be slightly weak.
My first point is that a god is not a requirement for morals, because morals are all personal. Morals vary between people, and if a god were to teach all of these morals, everyone of that faith would think the same on topics like gay rights, wars, etc.
My next point is that the Judeo-Christian god is not all that moral in and of itself, yet the majority of followers (mind you, not all of them) of these two faiths have morals. For example:
2 Kings 2:23-24 "2:23 And he went up from thence unto Bethel: and as he was going up by the way, there came forth little children out of the city, and mocked him, and said unto him, Go up, thou bald head; go up, thou bald head.
2:24 And he turned back, and looked on them, and cursed them in the name of the LORD. And there came forth two she bears out of the wood, and tare forty and two children of them."
In the given example, God smites children for making fun of someone. That definitely does not deserve death, but rather discipline.
http://skepticsannotatedbible.com... -> Bible quote 2 Kings 2:23-24
Prop argument: god is not a requirement for morals, because morals are all personal
My argument: By definition moral is "descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward...such as a religion". Morals were first created by God and defined in The Bible and without it, there is no incentive for an athiest to be moral.
My argument: Just because a leader isn't moral, that doesn't mean that the cause is immoral. Also, that passage from The Bible is not necessarily correct. These stories may have been exaggerated through the years.
I also wish to put forward that the worst dictators have been athiest. Hitler, Ghaddafi, etc etc
Don't forget: most Christians follow the Bible word for word.
Con said: I also wish to put forward that the worst dictators have been athiest. Hitler, Ghaddafi, etc etc
2 things: atheist*: spelling and grammar matter here. Second, Neither of them were atheists, that is a common thought. Adolf Hitler was very Christian and believed it was God's will that he was killing millions. Gaddafi was a Muslim, according to some research I have just done. Don't believe me? He used arguments in the Quran: http://jpfinn7.wordpress.com...
Con said: By definition moral is "descriptively to refer to some codes of conduct put forward...such as a religion". Morals were first created by God and defined in The Bible and without it, there is no incentive for an athiest to be moral.
I guess we disagree on the definition of morals. Here's my result:
1. A lesson, esp. one concerning what is right or prudent, that can be derived from a story, a piece of information, or an experience.
2. A person's standards of behavior or beliefs concerning what is and is not acceptable for them to do.
You also bring up the argument that religion is a code of conduct, but that is false. It gives one, but religion is not needed. Also, atheists can still practice religion, but not believe in God, which is the whole of this debate.
I await your response.
Cailean forfeited this round.
I think we should finish with the debate and have our closing arguments for our final round.
So, all of you voters, I would like to thank you for reading our arguments and I hope you vote for whoever you think deserved to win, and I hope you see that a belief in a god, yes, any god (which is why I did not capitalize god), is not required in order to have a sense of right and wrong.
I bring the closing to Cailean.
Cailean forfeited this round.
No votes have been placed for this debate.
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.