The Instigator
Purushadasa
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Bluepaintcan123
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Children Are Born in Ignorance -- Believers in atheist Dogma Remain So, Unto Death

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 1 vote the winner is...
Bluepaintcan123
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/5/2017 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 450 times Debate No: 103421
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (24)
Votes (1)

 

Purushadasa

Pro

Human and animal babies are born in ignorance: They can't control their bowel movements, they can't tie their shoes, they can't communicate with human language, and they don't know any facts about God.

As human babies of normal intelligence grow and mature, they learn all of these things from more mature, wiser, intelligent human beings.

The believer in atheist Dogma resists this human education process, and remains on the exact same intellectual platform as the messy-diapered babies and the lower animals, unto his death.
Bluepaintcan123

Con

In order to avoid any confusions or straw-man arguments, the definition of an Atheist is someone that does not believe in a god or gods.
Ex. You claim that you have a magical tiger god in your garage, but you won’t show me.
A theist would say “I believe you.”
An agnostic would say “I don’t know if it’s true or not, but I won’t take a hard stance.”
I (the Atheist) would say “Without any evidence, I don’t believe you.”
A Gnostic Atheist would say “Not only do I not believe you, but I KNOW there isn’t a tiger in there.”
We are not discussing Gnostic Atheism because you did not specify it as such, so do not generalize Atheism as Gnostic Atheism.

Firstly, I would like to note that Atheists “[not knowing] any facts about God” is simply not true.
I myself was brought up in a Roman-Catholic household, and we used to go to church every Sunday. I was baptized, had to learn about god and the bible, and did my confirmation. During the time when I was preparing for my confirmation I was doubting the existence of a god, and after it I officially called myself an Atheist.
If you’re not satisfied with the personal anecdote, according to the Pew Research Center, “78% of religious nones say they were raised in highly religious families”. “Almost half...went away from religion simply due to a lack of a belief.” (1) (For more specific reasons why, see 1a.)
(Religious nones = Atheists, Agnostics, No Affiliation)
If you think that educating children on religion will lead them to god, then why is it that a majority of those that don’t believe in god ARE educated on religion (at least to some degree)? Presumably a highly religious household would take it upon themselves to “enlighten” their children on god, no?
Of course, you may claim that they weren’t taught the “right” ideology, but then what would that be? You would need to specify what are the “correct teachings” and what aren’t.

Secondly, why is it that you correlate a lack of belief in a god with ignorance?
If that were true, we would probably see a high percent of uneducated Atheists running around, but this is not the case. About 38% of religious nones have a high school degree or less, with is about in line with other beliefs. Those with unusually high levels of low education are Catholic (46%), Evangelical Protestant (43%), Historically Black Protestant (52%) and Jehovah’s Witness (63%) (2).
(You can be an Atheist and be a genius/ignorant, you can be a Hindu and be a genius/ignorant, you can be a Muslim and be a genius/ignorant. It is not a matter of your belief, it is how you came to those conclusions, and what you know beyond religion.)
In addition, there have been studies done that demonstrate Atheist tend to have higher IQs. While I don’t believe IQs are an accurate way of measuring intelligence, the explanation of this phenomenon makes a big statement on religious communities and countries.
According to Nigel Barber, “Highly religious countries (Barber, 2012): Are poorer. They are less urbanized. Have lower levels of education. They have less exposure to electronic media that increase intelligence (Barber, 2006). Experience a heavier load of infectious diseases that impair brain function. Suffer more from low birth weights. Have worse child nutrition. Do a poor job of controlling environmental pollutants such as lead that reduce IQ.” (3)
From my interpretation, this isn’t about how intelligent non-religious people are (at least, not to an exceptional degree), but how uneducated religious people tend to be (and it also depends on what religion they belong to. Some religions are highly educated, like Hinduism (2), while some sects of Christianity are as educated as a third world country.)

My final point is that Atheists, as a whole, are not ignorant or stupid. Some of us may be brash and stubborn, but our belief does not make us any less intelligent than the average person. On the flip side, how religious you are (or even how informed on religion you are) is not an accurate measure of intelligence. It matters more that you can understand the world around you and defend your beliefs, otherwise how can you call yourself intelligent?
My personal opinion is that religion as a concept is not harmful, but the religions that have been created are. They typically propagate ignorance and enforce the idea that we should not explore other beliefs since they might contradict their own. They prey on people in poor and disadvantaged communities and manipulate them because they are less likely to question them.
Luckily there are some religions (like Buddhism) that are more positive than negative, and I would encourage people to favor the mentality of "seek enlightenment and be accepting" over the “most popular religions are best” or “the one I was raised in is best”.
I await your response.

Sources:
1. http://www.worldreligionnews.com...
1a. http://www.pewresearch.org...
2. http://www.pewforum.org...
3. https://www.psychologytoday.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Purushadasa

Pro

Someone wrote:

"In order to avoid any confusions or straw-man arguments, the definition of an Atheist is someone that does not believe in a god or gods."

No it isn't.

"Firstly, I would like to note that Atheists "[not knowing] any facts about God" is simply not true."

I never made that claim, so that is a straw man logical fallacy on your part.

"If you think that educating children on religion will lead them to God,"

I never stated that I think that, so that is another straw man on your part.

"You would need to specify what are the "correct teachings" and what aren"t."

The teachings that are correct are the teachings that God has revealed.

The ones that are incorrect are the ones that mankind made up (such as atheist Dogma).

"Secondly, why is it that you correlate a lack of belief in a god with ignorance?"

I didn't state such a correlation, so that is a third straw man logical fallacy on your part.

"you can be a Hindu"

Hindu is an ethnicity, not a religion or a faith.

"In addition, there have been studies done that demonstrate Atheist tend to have higher IQs."

No there haven't.

"Some religions are highly educated, like Hinduism"

Again, Hindu is an ethnicity, not a religion.

"My final point is that Atheists, as a whole, are not ignorant or stupid."

I never claimed they were, so that is a fourth straw man logical fallacy on your part.

"It matters more that you can understand the world around you"

Without God, nobody could understand the world around him.

" religion as a concept is not harmful, but the religions that have been created are."

The religions created by man (AKA the atheistic religions) are definitely harmful.

" They typically propagate ignorance and enforce the idea that we should not explore other beliefs since they might contradict their own."

Yes, believers in atheist Dogma do indeed do that, and that is why the religion of atheist Dogma is so harmful.

"They prey on people in poor and disadvantaged communities and manipulate them because they are less likely to question them."

Yes, believers in atheist Dogma do indeed do that -- thank you for your agreement and support, and God bless you! =)
Bluepaintcan123

Con

No it isn’t.


Citation please.

Here are some helpful sources:

https://www.atheists.org...

https://en.oxforddictionaries.com...

http://www.allaboutphilosophy.org...


I never made that claim


Your first argument explains that we are born with ignorance, and “they don't know any facts about God” is one of the things you listed. You go on to say we become educated on these things from other people, but Atheists resist the education process. That clearly implies that they ignore and/or deny religious teachings.

If that is not the point you were making, then explain your position clearly. I can’t properly debate you if you say I’m wrong but never bother to clarify.


"If you think that educating children on religion will lead them to God,"

I never stated that I think that, so that is another straw man on your part.


Make note of the “If” at the beginning of the sentence (as in, I am under the assumption you believe this but I can’t say for certain. Please clarify.) You didn’t exactly give me much to work with, and

these one sentence responses aren’t helping.

If you want me to debate your points (and I’m starting to doubt you do) then give more detailed arguments.


The teachings that are correct are the teachings that God has revealed.

The ones that are incorrect are the ones that mankind made up (such as atheist Dogma).


Okay...which god? The god of the Qu’ran? The god of the Torah?

I don’t know your religious affiliation or how you interpret your religion. A Wesboro Baptist and a Roman-Catholic aren’t similar in the least, so how can I argue against that if you won’t tell me anything?

You just set up these vague answers to yell out “Straw-man!” but never make a real argument.

Tell me specifically what you have against Atheists.

Ex.

“God tells us not to abort babies because that is murder! All these Atheists are supporting abortion, so therefore they are the ones with incorrect teachings!” You dramatically shout.

It is a generalization of Atheism but at least I can argue against it.

Also, Atheism does not have a set of beliefs. We do not have holy books and we all have our own morality and how we interpret the world. Some Atheists believe life has meaning while others are more Nihilistic. Some Atheists are pro-choice while others are pro-life. Some are feminists and some are not. Some are Conservative, Libertarian, Liberal, and everything inbetween.

You can’t pinpoint what “Atheist dogma” is because it doesn’t exist.


Again, Hindu is an ethnicity, not a religion.


Hinduism is an ethnic religion, so it’s both. It’s like being Jewish; some people are ethnically Jewish but don’t believe in Judaism, and some can be religiously Jewish without being ethnically Jewish.


"In addition, there have been studies done that demonstrate Atheist tend to have higher IQs."

No there haven't.


An article from Christianity Today (1) cited a study in which researchers attempted to find a correlation between certain beliefs and intelligence. I personally agree with the article in that intelligence doesn’t inherently make you religious or non-religious, however there is a tendency for intelligent people to be secular. The article is a bit naive in that it pins the scientific community as an enemy to the religious, but that is besides the point.


"It matters more that you can understand the world around you"

Without God, nobody could understand the world around him.


What makes you think that? Science has gotten very far in discovering how the universe works, and although it doesn’t have all the answers, it has explained a lot more than any religion has (last time I checked Physics wasn’t explained in the Bible.)

There are also some religious people that barely understand the world despite being devout. This includes flat-earthers, hollow-earthers, people that think the moon is fake, etc. They praise god and are clearly religious yet they can’t understand these important things about the world.

If I am totally missing the point, explain why god is necessary. Why can’t we discover these things on our own; what makes a god vital in this process of discovering?


" religion as a concept is not harmful, but the religions that have been created are."

The religions created by man (AKA the atheistic religions) are definitely harmful.


Unless you’re talking about Satanism, then this is false. Satanists as a whole do not worship a literal Satan, and therefore can be considered an "Atheist religion." There are no other “Atheistic religions”. If you’re talking about any other religion other than yours, then please state them as such. Even then, I can guarantee (if you would bother to tell me your religious association) I could find some horrid and harmful things related to your own religion.

Your beliefs are not pure, and neither are anyone else’s.


They typically propagate ignorance and enforce the idea that we should not explore other beliefs since they might contradict their own."

Yes, believers in atheist Dogma do indeed do that, and that is why the religion of atheist Dogma is so harmful.


Citation please.

Also, can you please tell me what you mean by “Atheist dogma”? You repeat this over and over but never clarify what that entails. Is it the godlessness? Is it worshipping “Evolutionism”? Is it bowing down to our “Atheist masters” like Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwin?


"They prey on people in poor and disadvantaged communities and manipulate them because they are less likely to question them."

Yes, believers in atheist Dogma do indeed do that -- thank you for your agreement and support, and God bless you! =)


There was no agreement.


Your homework for tonight:

-Define “Atheist Dogma”

-Clarify what your personal worldview and religion is

-Actually argue your point instead of being intentionally vague to make this more difficult than it has to be. You agreed to a debate, so act like it.


Sources:

1. http://www.christianitytoday.com...

1a. https://www.psychologytoday.com...


Debate Round No. 2
Purushadasa

Pro

Someone wrote:

"The teachings that are correct are the teachings that God has revealed.

The ones that are incorrect are the ones that mankind made up (such as atheist Dogma).

"Okay...which God?""

There is only one God.

"I don"t know your religious affiliation or how you interpret your religion.

I don't have a religion.

You just set up these vague answers to yell out "Straw-man!""

I never made that statement, so that is a straw man logical fallacy on your part.

"Tell me specifically what you have against Atheists."

There's no such thing as an atheist, so nothing.

"Also, Atheism does not have a set of beliefs. We do not have holy books and we all have our own morality and how we interpret the world. Some Atheists believe life has meaning while others are more Nihilistic. Some Atheists are pro-choice while others are pro-life. Some are feminists and some are not. Some are Conservative, Libertarian, Liberal, and everything inbetween."

That entire statement of yours, in quotes directly above this sentence, was a set of atheistic beliefs.

"You can"t pinpoint what "Atheist dogma" is because it doesn"t exist."

Yes it does.

Again, Hindu is an ethnicity, not a religion.

"Hinduism is an ethnic religion"

No it isn't.

", so it"s both"

No it isn't.

". It"s like being Jewish"

No it isn't:
The word Hindu designates an ethnicity only -- not a religion or a faith. It refers exclusively to the ethnic group that is native to the Sindh river valley. Hindus can be any religion: Christians, Muslims, agnostics, or even believers in atheist Dogma. The word Hindu does not appear in any of God's revealed scriptures, and it is no more a religion thanR03; Irish, Chinese, African, Palestinian, or Lithuanian could somehow be religions. The word Hindu does not connote any specific religious overtones: It designates an ethnicity only. Hindus who accept Jesus are still Hindus -- they don't become Palestinians -- just as I remained Irish-American when I accepted Jesus and I did not convert to Palestinian. Although Jesus was a Palestinian, simply being Palestinian doesn't carry any specific religious overtones -- some Palestinians are Jewish, some are Christian, some are Muslim, and some are atheist -- and being a Hindu works the same way as being a Palestinian: Both Palestinian and Hindu are ethnic designations only.

"In addition, there have been studies done that demonstrate Atheist tend to have higher IQs."

No there haven't.

"It matters more that you can understand the world around you"

Without God, nobody could understand the world around him.

"What makes you think that?"

I think it because it is an objectively true fact.

" Science has gotten very far in discovering how the universe works"

No it hasn't.

", and although it doesn"t have all the answers, it has explained a lot more than any religion has"

No it hasn't.

"There are also some religious people that barely understand the world despite being devout"

Yes, such as believers in atheist Dogma, for example.

"Why can"t we discover these things on our own; what makes a god vital in this process of discovering?"

Without God, nobody could discover anything.

" religion as a concept is not harmful, but the religions that have been created are."

The religions created by man (AKA the atheistic religions) are definitely harmful.

"Unless you"re talking about Satanism, then this is false."

No it isn't.

" Satanists as a whole do not worship a literal Satan, and therefore can be considered an "Atheist religion." There are no other "Atheistic religions"."

Yes there are.

" If you"re talking about any other religion other than yours, then please state them as such. Even then, I can guarantee (if you would bother to tell me your religious association"

Again, I don't have a religion.

") I could find some horrid and harmful things related to your own religion."

No you couldn't.

"Your beliefs are not pure, and neither are anyone else"s."

I don't have any beliefs.

"They typically propagate ignorance and enforce the idea that we should not explore other beliefs since they might contradict their own."

Yes, believers in atheist Dogma do indeed do that, and that is why the religion of atheist Dogma is so harmful.

"Also, can you please tell me what you mean by "Atheist dogma"?"

Which part of the exceedingly simple, two-part phrase "atheist Dogma" do you fail to understand? "atheist," or "Dogma?"

" You repeat this over and over but never clarify what that entails. Is it the godlessness? Is it worshipping "Evolutionism"? Is it bowing down to our "Atheist masters" like Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwin?"

Those three things are all part of atheist Dogma, yes. All of your other statements since this debate began are also part of atheist Dogma: You are a believer in atheist Dogma.

"They prey on people in poor and disadvantaged communities and manipulate them because they are less likely to question them."

Yes, believers in atheist Dogma do indeed do that -- thank you for your agreement and support, and God bless you! =)

"There was no agreement."

Yes there was -- you made the statement and I agreed with the statement.

-"Clarify what your personal worldview and religion is"

Again, I do not have a religion, but you can call my worldview "realism."
Bluepaintcan123

Con

"Okay...which God?""

There is only one God.

"I don"t know your religious affiliation or how you interpret your religion.

I don't have a religion.


Everyone has a religious affiliation, honey. If you take the stance that you believe in a god, that means you have a religious affiliation. You are some type of Theist or Deist if you believe in a god. If you believe in a non-intervening god, you are a Deist, and if not, you are a Theist.

You just set up these vague answers to yell out "Straw-man!""

I never made that statement, so that is a straw man logical fallacy on your part.


You just did. Also, you really never yelled out “straw-man”? Strange, I seem to recall this differently. (Just look up)


"Tell me specifically what you have against Atheists."

There's no such thing as an atheist, so nothing.


Ok...You use the term “Atheist dogma”, as in, the dogma of Atheists. You have one (metaphorically) standing right in front of you, but you deny my existence? Are you sure you exist?

I assume you think that everyone believes in god, and that Atheists just pretend they don’t, but that would be ridiculous. I think that flat-earthers are wrong, but I won’t deny that they exist, or that they believe what they say.

This may be a little difficult for you to comprehend, but some people don’t see evidence for god. They think that there are better explanations as to how the world came to be. We are not some magical peanut butter monkey monster that lives in coat pockets, we are just people with different opinions.


"Also, Atheism does not have a set of beliefs...Some are Conservative, Libertarian, Liberal, and everything inbetween."

That entire statement of yours, in quotes directly above this sentence, was a set of atheistic beliefs.


Um, no. I listed a set of contradictory beliefs that various Atheists might have.

In order for them to be a set of Atheistic beliefs, they would have to be something that Atheists, as a whole, agree on.

Have you heard of the term ideology? Everyone has one, and each ideology has a different set of beliefs. If we wanted to list the set of beliefs that Atheists have, there would have to be a consensus as to what they are. An Atheist can’t be an Atheist if they believe in god.

All Atheists do not believe in god, period. This is the only thing that binds a person to that label. Aside from that, they can think whatever they want about the world as long as it does not contradict that point.

In order for someone to be a Christian, that person would have to believe in the divinity of Christ, period.

A set of beliefs cannot be a set of beliefs if they directly contradict each other (clarification is the only exception.)

Ex.

“I believe that life is sacred, so abortion is wrong!”

“Then why do you support the death penalty?”

“It is sacred until you commit an atrocious act worthy of death, then you forfeit your life.”


Again, Hindu is an ethnicity, not a religion.

"Hinduism is an ethnic religion"

No it isn't.

", so it"s both"

No it isn't.

". It"s like being Jewish"

No it isn't:


You don’t have to feel embarrassed if you didn’t understand it the first time. Here are some helpful sources for you to understand Hinduism as a religion:

http://www.bbc.co.uk...

https://www.himalayanacademy.com...

http://www.beliefnet.com...


"In addition, there have been studies done that demonstrate Atheist tend to have higher IQs."

No there haven't.


1. Scroll up to Round 2

2. Go to the bottom of my argument

3. Click on the (1) link

4. Click on the study the article references

5. Read it

Your Welcome :)


"It matters more that you can understand the world around you"

Without God, nobody could understand the world around him.

"What makes you think that?"

I think it because it is an objectively true fact.


Have you forgotten where you are? Do you need any help? This is a debate, so when you make a claim, you have to support it with evidence. Even if it is “an objectively true fact”, you need to show me.

At least try to prove your point. You haven’t won any debates as is, so I don’t see the point of lazily strewing some nonsensical points while demonstrating your lack of knowledge on anything you talk about.

Seriously, ask some people for pointers on how to organize your arguments. It will go a long way.


") I could find some horrid and harmful things related to your own religion."

No you couldn't.


Now I can’t because you haven’t told me anything.

Let’s give you the benefit of the doubt and say you have a special version of god that no one has thought of yet. One can argue that the belief in god is harmful in itself. Considering that “harm” is subjective, yes, that can be argued, and you can’t deny that.

It is harmful to put all your faith and trust into someone with absolute power, because their morality may not be trustworthy in the least. It is only “correct” because they say so, and the only reason you listen to that is because they have power over you. If their most convincing argument is the threat of punishment, you should not trust them.


"Your beliefs are not pure, and neither are anyone else"s."

I don't have any beliefs.


This honestly made me laugh, so thanks for that.

1. You believe in a god

2. You believe that all other religions are false

3. You believe that Atheists don’t exist.

These are all beliefs.


"Also, can you please tell me what you mean by "Atheist dogma"?"

Which part of the exceedingly simple, two-part phrase "atheist Dogma" do you fail to understand? "atheist," or "Dogma?"

" You repeat this over and over but never clarify what that entails. Is it the godlessness? Is it worshipping "Evolutionism"? Is it bowing down to our "Atheist masters" like Richard Dawkins and Charles Darwin?"

Those three things are all part of atheist Dogma, yes. All of your other statements since this debate began are also part of atheist Dogma: You are a believer in atheist Dogma.


Do you not understand what a joke is? Or do you think I pray to Dawkins every night before bed, and read verses of The God Delusion to ward of Christians?

I already explained why “Atheist dogma” doesn’t exist based on your horrible and almost nonexistent explanation of it. When you debate someone you are supposed to read all of their arguments and prove why they are wrong (or, if you can’t, admit they have a point.)


"There was no agreement."

Yes there was -- you made the statement and I agreed with the statement.


No there wasn’t. You purposefully misinterpreted my argument and agreed with that, not my actual argument. You can’t change reality to suit your needs because someone will call you out for that.


-"Clarify what your personal worldview and religion is"

Again, I do not have a religion, but you can call my worldview "realism."


Your worldview is an art style? All jokes aside, your “amazing” last line is ridiculous.

You decided to join a website that was about debating other people and arguing your worldview. Out of excitement (or your ego) you challenged person after person, claws bared. Once you entered the ring, all that bravado was for naught.

Instead of writing detailed arguments that deconstructed your opponent's claims, you say “No it isn’t.” just like a child. Not a bit of class either; you’re just as good at debating as you are humble. I could excuse that if you bothered to write more than three words, but you couldn’t even offer me that.

No one is convinced you’re right but you.

All I wanted was a bit of openness that comes with a typical debate. I hope you learn something from your lackluster performance.

So, as you’ve said to countless other people: “You lost the debate: Thanks for your time! =)”


Debate Round No. 3
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
By the way, you lost the debate: Thanks for your time, and have a nice life! =)
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
Without God, nobody could actually be sure of anything.
Posted by Bluepaintcan123 5 months ago
Bluepaintcan123
@Purushadasa Oh yeah, I'm sure that 49-year-old medical professional would have the comebacks of a 13-year-old troll. Have fun, 'cause I'm moving on.
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
"The most levels of sarcasm???" Huh???

Are you off your meds? LOLOLOLOLOLOL SMH =)
Posted by Bluepaintcan123 5 months ago
Bluepaintcan123
@Purushadasa Thank you for confirming that you can't even process the most levels of sarcasm.
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
Thank you for confirming the fact that God is real: Only a real entity could possibly "abandon" anyone. =)
Posted by Bluepaintcan123 5 months ago
Bluepaintcan123
@Purushadasa It seems that god has abandoned you.
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between intelligence and stupidity.
Posted by Bluepaintcan123 5 months ago
Bluepaintcan123
@Purushadasa Thank you for proving how unapologetically stupid you are.
You lost the debate. Thank you for your time =)
Posted by Purushadasa 5 months ago
Purushadasa
My opponent wrote:

""There was no agreement."

Yes there was -- you made the statement and I agreed with the statement.

No there wasn"t."

Yes there was.

"You purposefully misinterpreted my argument"

Actually, you are the only one in this debate that has done that, and you did it multiple times. Therefore I won the debate.

"You can"t change reality to suit your needs because someone will call you out for that."

Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between reality and fantasy.

-""Clarify what your personal worldview and religion is"

Again, I do not have a religion, but you can call my worldview "realism."

Your worldview is an art style?"

No, but I call yours a joke.

" All jokes aside, your "amazing" last line is ridiculous."

No it isn't.

" you"re just as good at debating as you are humble"

Without God, humility could not be an objectively good thing.

"No one is convinced you"re right but you."

Without God, nobody could make an objective distinction between right and wrong.

All I wanted was a bit of openness that comes with a typical debate. I hope you learn something from your lackluster performance.

You lost the debate: Thanks for your time! =)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Phenenas 5 months ago
Phenenas
PurushadasaBluepaintcan123Tied
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 argued like a child, saying "no it's not" to all of Con's points with no further elaboration. Any points he made come from his own despicable human-hating worldview, with no evidence even from the Bible.