The Instigator
IntellectVsSpirit5000
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
Hayd
Con (against)
Winning
8 Points

Christianity is no more dangerous than Atheism

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 2 votes the winner is...
Hayd
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/15/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,042 times Debate No: 79777
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (11)
Votes (2)

 

IntellectVsSpirit5000

Pro

Christianity is no more dangerous than Atheism. I take the pro stance on this because I believe this to be true. Good luck to con.
Hayd

Con

I accept the debate resolution and I look forward to debating my opponent on this issue. To clarify I will be arguing that the ideology of atheism is a more dangerous position to hold than of Christianity.

Atheist: One who disbelieves and denies the existence of god(s).
Danger: the possibility of suffering harm or injury (physical or psychological).

More: Greater than the opposition.


Christianity: The monotheist religion that is based on the teachings of Jesus of Nazareth, or its beliefs and practices. (Includes all subreligions: Catholicism, Methodist, Protestant, Mormonism, etc.)
Debate Round No. 1
IntellectVsSpirit5000

Pro

What were the religion and political views of Joseph Stalin?

Stalin was raised devout in the church. His parents hoped he would become a priest. He became a suppressing Atheist instead.

Stalin was a Marxist with his own slant on the philosophy, a slant he used to justify the killing of millions of Russians.

http://hollowverse.com...

One month during World War II, Joseph Stalin became worried that some of his military officers might challenge his total power, so he ordered the execution of 30,000 Russian officers, or half of the army and navy staff.
As the war drew on, Stalin put through "Order 270," which decreed that all Russian soldiers and officers taken prisoner by the Germans were "traitors" and should be sent to the penal camps. Then, as the battles grew even more savage, he put through Order 227, which effectively said, "No one can retreat."

articles.chicagotribune.com/1997-07-25/news/9707250034_1_thousands-of-polish-officers-battle

Adolf Hitler was an Atheist.

Evans wrote that Hitler repeatedly stated that Nazism was a secular ideology founded on science, which in the long run could not "co-exist with religion".

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

Hitler goes down in my book as one of the most evil leaders of all time. The attempted mass killing of the entire Jewish and "non Aryan" race, I view as the most vicious war crime committed in the modern era.

An eyewitness to the Holocaust shares his story. This is an excerpt from an interview of Alfred Schnog. (A child who witnessed the Holocaust)

Article By: Si Cantwell

The government confiscated the German arm of the Schnog family business, a metals import-export company. Alfred's father was forced to work for the Nazis, work deemed vital to the German war effort.

The family avoided disclosing that they were Jewish. They lived undercover except when the kids were in school.

Jewish children went to separate schools, taught by teachers who'd been fired for their religion.

When school let out, the kids were often chased by Hitler Youth.

"My brother and I learned to run very fast," Schnog said, adding that it was an advantage later, on the athletic fields of America.

By 1938, his parents realized there was no future for the family in Germany. But it was hard to leave.

During the Evian Conference of July 1938, the United States and other countries refused to greatly increase the numbers of Jews they would accept. Getting a visa to the United States was like winning a lottery, Schnog said.

Finally, his father's business connections led to a job offer from the Netherlands.

So on Nov. 9, 1938, a moving van pulled up to the Schnog house and the family went to spend the night at the Dom Hotel in Cologne before boarding a train to Amsterdam the next morning.

"Boys, get up." It was their parents, shaking them awake.

The boys stood behind drapes, in front of the second-floor hotel window looking out over a district of high-end shops, many owned by Jews.

"The Brown Shirts were throwing rocks through the windows" and entering the stores, he recalled. "The merchandise clattered in the cobblestone street."

"They were rioting and yelling curses at Jews," he said.

"Boys, don't ever forget what you see here tonight," their parents said.

http://www.starnewsonline.com...

Creationism shows to be no more dangerous than Atheism. Christianity and Atheism both have their share of maniacs, making Christianity no more dangerous than Atheism. Perhaps it's insanity that is the problem and not Christianity.
Hayd

Con

C1) Atheism Death Penalty

In 13 countries, if you are convicted as being an atheist, you are executed. These countries include; Afghanistan, Iran, Malaysia, Maldives, Mauritania, Nigeria, Pakistan, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, United Arab Emirates and Yemen [1] Only one country in the world actually kills Christians and that is North Korea. Yet even there, most of the time it is deportment to a labor camp, not death.

C2) Hate Crimes

A great many people in the world openly despise and hate atheists. [3] This results in a great number of hate crimes that forces thousands of atheists to hide within their own homes.

“On Tuesday of last week, Ananta Bijoy Das, 32, had just left his house in the northeastern Bangladeshi city of Sylhet when four masked assailants chased and then hacked the bank clerk to death with machetes. He was the third secular blogger hacked to pieces on the streets of Bangladesh this year.” [2]

The main reason for this is that atheists are a minority. Christians make up 31.5% of the world’s population, the largest religion on Earth. [4] Not many people attack the majority, but they do go after the minorities; atheists. This is increased through the propaganda put out by religious leaders and the connotation the word brings. People think atheists have no moral values, they are heartless, and evil. With this kind of propaganda, it is dangerous to be an atheist.

[1] http://www.reuters.com...
[2] http://www.politico.com...
[3] http://www.paulopes.com.br...
[4] http://www.pewforum.org...
Debate Round No. 2
IntellectVsSpirit5000

Pro

I begin by responding to Hayd's claim that Atheists are killed for being the minority while Christians, who are "the majority", happily sleep on an undisturbed "bed of roses".

In order to be the majority, you must compose 50%+ of the population. Christianity does not compose 50+% of the world's population even according to Hayd's own post. Christianity may be the biggest religion numberswise, but it is not the majority.

majority
1.
the greater part or number; the number larger than half the total.

dictionary.reference.com/browse/majority

"ISIS beheads Christians in Libya"

http://www.cnn.com...

"ISIS declares war on the cross. 21 Christians beheaded"

http://www.ijreview.com...

"ISIS executes 30 Christians by beheading"

http://m.therightscoop.com...

"Christian children executed in Iraq"

http://www.israelvideonetwork.com...

" 'Lord Jesus Christ' last words of Egyptian Christians"

http://youtu.be...

"Kenya Garissa University: Christian victims beheaded for not knowing the Koran"

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk...

"ISIS kidnaps 100 Christians"

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk...

"Nearly 150 dead in Al-Shabaab school attack, Kenyan officials say"

"If you were Christian, you were shot on the spot..."

http://www.foxnews.com...

Cassie Ren" Bernall (November 6, 1981"" April 20, 1999) was a student killed in the Columbine High School massacre.

Initial reports suggested that Eric Harris asked if Bernall believed in God moments before she was fatally shot. She was reported to have answered "Yes".[1] This story led to Bernall being presented as a martyr by some Christians, and served as the inspiration for several songs, including Michael W. Smith's "This Is Your Time"[2] and Flyleaf's "Cassie;"[3] the video for "This Is Your Time" includes a short clip at its beginning of Bernall talking about her beliefs.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

If you Google search "Christians beheaded" or "Christians killed", the list of articles that pops up is unsermountable.

Adolf Hitler led Germany during World War II when he executed six million Jews in the Holocaust, three million Poles, three million Russian prisoners of war, and as many as eight million others throughout Europe. Joseph Stalin was the General Secretary of the Soviet Union following the Russian Revolution until his death after World War II. Between 10 and 20 million Soviets and German prisoners of war died under his regime, depending on how many famine victims you count, from Gulags, execution, and forced resettlement. Mao Zedong, who led China for more than a quarter of a century following World War II, created the Great Leap Forward and Cultural Revolution programs which collectively killed unknown tens of millions of Chinese, most of them in public executions and violent clashes. Pol Pot led the Khmer Rouge in Cambodia during the 1970's, when as many as 2 million Cambodians, or as much as 20% of the population, died from execution, disease and starvation.

skeptoid.com/mobile/4076

Was this Atheism at work? Well, it most certainly was not Christianity at work. Again, was this Atheism at work? No. This was insanity and "God Complex" at work, similar to David Karesh in Waco, TX who was a Christian right? It's hard to say he was a Christian. A Christian would be a follower of Christ. It's hard to say you were a follower of Christ when you claimed to be Christ. David Karesh was the same as the Atheist dictators listed above. He was insane and had "God complex", and 100% literal in his case. They all abused absolute power absolutely. They were all driven by the madness that thirsts for power, Godlikeness, and striking fear into others or lusting in a lake of Supremecy above many or all. Christianity is no more dangerous than Atheism. Both Theisms have been the belief indoctrinated into men who have exhibited behaviors that would be deemed worthy of the Death Penalty in certain states in the U.S. and defined as war crimes, murder, methods of madness, and completely uncomprehensible in Westernized cultures. Christianity is not the problem any more than Atheism is the problem. The mind of the criminally insane is the problem. A power hungry, bloodlusting maniac will find a reason to justify their madness whether through religion or something else, but in the end, no matter their beliefs, the belief or lack thereof has not proven to stop them from carrying out their lust for insane power, insane self glorification, or blatant unmerciful murder and on a massive scale in some cases.
Hayd

Con

Here I will address my opponent's opening arguments in Round 2. I will address Pro's R3 response in R4.

R1) Stalin


Pro spends this entire contention explaining how terrible a person Stalin was. It is implied that this was a result of him being atheist, but not directly stated. Yet Pro fails to prove how Stalin killed millions because of his atheism. He could have killed millions because of his political ideologies, his cultural upbringing, hunger for power, etc. Pro has failed to prove that atheism was the sole cause of such, and therefore this argument has no impact.

R1) Hitler

Hitler was a self-proclaimed Christian, he committed mass genocide to achieve racial purity in Europe, leaving only the master race (Aryans.) Pro implying that this was the result of his supposed atheism shows Pro’s lack of knowledge on the very topic he is arguing. Hitler didn’t even persecute Christians! He persecuted Jews, this argument has no relation to the debate at all. What makes it even more off-track is that Hitler hated atheists, he actually massacred millions for Christianity.

“We were convinced that the people need and require this faith. We have therefore undertaken the fight against the atheistic movement, and that not merely with a few theoretical declarations; we have stamped it out.” [1]

"I believe that I am acting in accordance with the will of the Almighty Creator: by defending myself against the Jew, I am fighting for the work of the Lord.." [2]

The tragic story Pro quotes has nothing to do with the topic. It does not prove the impact of the argument, that Hitler was an atheist. This argument is non-topical and null.

Pro’s closing remarks add another argument. Pro claims that both Atheism and Christianity have maniacs, therefore they are no more dangerous than each other. Christianity holds more of the population and therefore has more of their share of maniacs. Pro can’t even prove that any atheist maniacs killed because of their atheism, I can. (e.g. Christian Crusades, Spanish Inquisition, etc.)

[1] https://michaelsherlockauthor.wordpress.com...
[2] http://www.nobeliefs.com...

Debate Round No. 3
IntellectVsSpirit5000

Pro

The Christian Crusades and the Spanish Inquisition are not applicable to modern day reality. What happened several hundred years ago is not the reality of Christianity today. These very "Christians" fought an archaic war between Catholics and Protestants as well. This was not a war caused by any modern Christian concept that is accepted by any notable amount of Christians if hardly any at all. These ancient wars were based on the views of the time and the monotheistic leadership roles of the time. Much of the knowledge we have today was not known at the time of these battles. Can you remember any time this century where the "Christian army" stood against the "Islamic army"? Or the Catholics and Protestants went head to head in a battle royale? The answer is no. The midevil war and religious concepts are archaic and have no bareing on modern Christianity. In that day, democracy as we know it today was not very vast. To not fight on behalf of your king's will was heracy, and you would be killed and considered a disgrace. Superstitions of the time were much more widespread and powerful than today. Lightning and thunder was God's anger. Meteors burning through the atmosphere were signs and wonders. Floods were God. Nothing of this matter was nature based or science based. Everything must have been God somehow. This concluded with humans beings afraid of the nature of physics and scientifically explained phenomenon. The Bible depicts humanity becoming more intelligent and having knowledge in the end of days. We have much more knowledge today, which wasn't hard to predict, but the truth remains. We are not so superstitious today because we know "why" on so many more things that used to have no answer. We also live in a world where individuals in the modern world have much more individual rights and education abilities. It is also more accepted now to stand against leadership or go against the grain as an individual.

Hitler was born Catholic just as Stalin was born into the Russian Orthodox Church and Mao was raised as a Buddhist. These facts prove nothing as many people reject their religious upbringing, as these three men did. From an early age, historian Allan Bullock writes, Hitler "had no time at all for Catholic teaching, regarding it as a religion fit only for slaves and detesting its ethics."

www.catholiceducation.org/en/controversy/common-misconceptions/was-hitler-a-christian.html

Claiming that Hitler's rhetoric makes him a Christian is the same as confusing political opportunism with personal conviction. Hitler himself says in Mein Kampf that his public statements should be understood as propaganda that bears no relation to the truth but is designed to sway the masses.

Hitler originally wanted to call his forthcoming book Viereinhalb Jahre (des Kampfes) gegen L"ge, Dummheit und Feigheit, or Four and a Half Years (of Struggle) Against Lies, Stupidity and Cowardice.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org...

In Mein Kampf (page 278)Hitler speaks of the evolution of organic things and says "the strong will rule", a reference to the concept of "survival of the fittest". It's typically nontypical for a Christian to ascribe to the Theory of Evolution and was much more so in the 1920's, 1930's, and 1940's. Christians today, who are a less religious and more laidback version of Christianity than in the 1920's-1940's, and are much more scientifically educated, do not often accept Evolution as a fact, but Hitler did, and not of 2015 ideology but the ideology of the 1920's-1940's ideology. If I seem wrong, go ask your grandparents if they are available.

I note that Hitler was chewing on the notion of using the word "stupidity" in the title of his book according to this source. It is hard for me to believe Hitler was a Christian because his actions say he was not. I personally do not ever use the word "stupid" towards someone, and it is because of my Christian beliefs. A look over of all of my posts on this forum is welcome if deemed neccessary. I have never used the word as a reference to anyone I was in disagreement with on this forum. Why? Because I reverence and respect God and His commands based on the Christian Bible and its commands.

New International Version
(1 John 4:8)
Whoever does not love does not know God, because God is love.

So what is love?

1 Corinthians 13:4-5
New International Version

4"Love is patient, love is kind. It does not envy, it does not boast, it is not proud. 5"It does not dishonor others, it is not self-seeking, it is not easily angered, it keeps no record of wrongs.

Did Hitler fear these words or even care based on his actions? I think it is more than fair to say no.
Hayd

Con

It was extremely difficult to decipher what my opponent was trying to point out in his response. So forgive me if I misinterpret something. I am referring to Pro’s R3 response.

The first thing my opponent does is correct my grammar and say that the largest religion in the world is not the majority. I did what any other person on Earth would have done; Google the definition of “majority”. I invite you all to do the same

majority: the greater number

I don’t want to spend anymore characters on this superficial topic, the biggest religion is Christianity.

After this Pro goes on a rant and cites a bunch of articles showing Christians getting killed. This is not a source-war, the side that posts the most deaths does not prove how much dangerous it is. Pro must prove to us that being Christian, being a part of the biggest religion ever is more dangerous than being a part of the hated minority of atheists. Posting links to arguments does not accomplish this at all, at best it is source spamming.

Directly after this there is a paragraph telling us what Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot did without incorporating why this makes Christians more in danger than atheists. These leaders did not persecute Christians, thus Christians are were not in danger any more than atheists were.

After this Pro attempts to explain why criminals do crime. Which has nothing to do with the debate. Concluding that people will kill each other whether they believe or not. Pro needs to prove to us that a Christian living in the world is just as safe as an Atheist living in the world, not whether or not people commit crimes because of their religion.

Conclusion:

Everything Pro has said this round has been off-topic, and has done nothing to prove his side. I would like to point out that Pro has not even tried to address my arguments except dispute my definition of a “majority”, my arguments are dropped.

Debate Round No. 4
IntellectVsSpirit5000

Pro

I will start by addressing some of Con's arguments.

(1)"After this Pro attempts to explain why criminals do crime. Which has nothing to do with the debate. Concluding that people will kill each other whether they believe or not."

Rebutal:
The debate is "Christianity is no more dangerous than Atheism." To be specific, the Christian belief is no more dangerous than the Atheistic belief. Showing that both beliefs have maniacs is not off topic but completely on topic. The fact that both sides have had maniacs is mild evidence that it's not the belief that is the real problem. It is the individual person that is the problem. Individuals are what is dangerous and not the Christian or Atheistic beliefs. Individuals caused the Waco incident, the Holocaust, and every individually based crime in the modern history of Western culture. If you want to claim Islam is more dangerous than Atheism, I will step aside gladly, but this debate isn't the danger or lack thereof of religion but the danger of Christianity vs. Atheism. Islam and Christianity are opposites of each other and very unsimilar. This debate is Christianity and not religion to make sure this is clear.

(2)"Directly after this there is a paragraph telling us what Hitler, Stalin, Mao Zedong, and Pol Pot did without incorporating why this makes Christians more in danger than atheists."

Rebutal:
I am not trying to prove Christianity is in any danger. I am trying to prove that the belief of Christianity is not dangerous any more than the belief of Atheism is dangerous. I personally do not actually feel any serious danger from either group as a general rule but am well aware that every group, religious or not, has its nutjobs. But so called Christian maniacs represent Christianity with the same representation as Stalin represents Atheism, and that is, they don't represent those beliefs. David Karesh does not make Christianity dangerous. He makes insanity and David Karesh dangerous. Stalin does not make Atheism dangerous. He makes insanity and Joseph Stalin dangerous. Without their beliefs, they would have found some other ideology to mutate and take to insane extremes. That is what dillusion, god complexed madmen do.

One Country(Con's claim)
(3)"Only one country in the world actually kills Christians and that is North Korea. Yet even there, most of the time it is deportment to a labor camp, not death"

(I now will show a copy and paste example that easily refutes Con's claim that only North Korea kills Christians and that I have not attempted to refute his argument despite this having nothing to do with how dangerous Christianity is to the world and how nondangerous Atheism is to the world.)

------------
"ISIS beheads Christians in Libya"

http://www.cnn.com......

"ISIS declares war on the cross. 21 Christians beheaded"

http://www.ijreview.com......

"ISIS executes 30 Christians by beheading"

http://m.therightscoop.com......

"Christian children executed in Iraq"

http://www.israelvideonetwork.com......

" 'Lord Jesus Christ' last words of Egyptian Christians"

http://youtu.be......

"Kenya Garissa University: Christian victims beheaded for not knowing the Koran"

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk......

"ISIS kidnaps 100 Christians"

http://www.ibtimes.co.uk......

"Nearly 150 dead in Al-Shabaab school attack, Kenyan officials say"

"If you were Christian, you were shot on the spot..."

http://www.foxnews.com......

Cassie Ren" Bernall (November 6, 1981"" April 20, 1999) was a student killed in the Columbine High School massacre.
------------

Rebutal:
It is not just North Korea.

(4)"I would like to point out that Pro has not even tried to address my arguments except dispute my definition of a "majority", my arguments are dropped."

Rebutal:
We proved this wrong in the above rebutal.

I feel confident with my argument that the Christian belief is no more dangerous to the society than the belief of Atheism is dangerous to society. If Con is trying to twist the debate into "Atheism is a more dangerous belief system to be a part of, I reference that Islamic terrorists singled out the U.S. on 9/11 because they view the U.S. as a "Christian nation". They are beheading Christians in mass, not Atheists. In the Quran 9:38-39 it says to kill and punish Jews and Christians. The Quran more specifically says to slash these 2 groups' people by their throats. This does not reference Atheists. It references Christians and Jews. Either way Con wants this debate to go, he still remains trapped, cornered, and in check mate.

I thank Con for the debate.
Hayd

Con

I will waive this response to keep the debate fair, so I will sum up my side of the debate and state my concluding remarks.

My opening arguments addressed the persecution of atheists across the world and how it is literally against the law to be atheist, punishable by death. My other argument addressed the hate that is put towards atheists across the world and how atheists are an extreme minority, while Christianity is the largest religion in the world. Both of these arguments are completely dropped, except for my definition of majority, which is then dropped directly afterwards.

The majority of my opponent’s topics did not prove his case; that Christians are in more danger than atheists. They showed that some atheists did bad things, but none of them put Christians in harm instead atheists. Pro repeatedly went off-topic talking about insane people, maniacs, etc. which made his responses confusing and unorganized.

The only step that Pro ever made towards proving his case was source-spamming me with articles, which showed isolated incidents, yet could not apply to the entire resolution as a whole.. Thank you for the debate, vote Con!
Debate Round No. 5
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by skipsaweirdo 2 years ago
skipsaweirdo
My very simplistic view...
Christians believe everyone will be judged and suffer punishment for transgressions
Atheists believe that only people caught by other people will suffer judgement for transgressions.
What's a more dangerous thought to hold, do it and possibly get away with it, or do it and you WILL be judged and/or "caught" no matter what....I report, lol, you decide.
Posted by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
Reading through now.
Posted by ZakOak 2 years ago
ZakOak
"States ZakOak who miraculously and conveniently, as of this comment, has zero posts and zero debates. I feel this is suspicious statistically and "by chance", or perhaps it is simply "devine". ;-)"

So what i say can be ignored just because i yet haven't done a debate...nice dodge. I'm not here to measure post & debate count virtual penises. I suggest you go to the arguments instead of attacking person in future.

I don't put further input on this because this section is reserved for comments, not for debates.
Posted by IntellectVsSpirit5000 2 years ago
IntellectVsSpirit5000
Yes, isolated events are as large as the Crusades and the reign of murders by Stalin and Hitler. Notice that it is not Christianity or Judaism that is control today (in real life)of the exact same area the Crusades were fought over. Why is that?
Posted by maxwell.lane 2 years ago
maxwell.lane
"Can you remember any time this century where the "Christian army" stood against the "Islamic army"? Or the Catholics and Protestants went head to head in a battle royale?"
Yes.
Cristian militias fighting Isis
Northern Ireland Conflict
And fights about Kennedy, the first Catholic President
Posted by maxwell.lane 2 years ago
maxwell.lane
u
Posted by IntellectVsSpirit5000 2 years ago
IntellectVsSpirit5000
Secular: "Decisions should be made without reference to religious beliefs"

Atheism: "I have no reason to belief in gods/god.

Here is what we know about Hitler. He wanted it to all be secular, he stood agsinst Christianity with vigor, he claimed no particular religion during his Holocaust reign of terror, he was a habitual drug user and addict, , he commited double suicide, he mass murdered the "chosen people of God", the Jews, according to Judaism and Christianity, and those nearest to him spoke of his Atheistic beliefs. With no disrespect intended, I quote the Christian Bible. "Wisdom is known of her children."
Posted by IntellectVsSpirit5000 2 years ago
IntellectVsSpirit5000
States ZakOak who miraculously and conveniently, as of this comment, has zero posts and zero debates. I feel this is suspicious statistically and "by chance", or perhaps it is simply "devine". ;-)
Posted by ZakOak 2 years ago
ZakOak
"Adolf Hitler was an Atheist.

Evans wrote that Hitler repeatedly stated that Nazism was a secular ideology founded on science, which in the long run could not "co-exist with religion"."

Hitler was not an atheist. Also, secularism is not same as atheism. It would be interesting to know Evans source on this. People who say Hitler was an atheist commonly site distorted translation of Hitler's table talk.

Also, worth to check:

https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
Posted by fdsa 2 years ago
fdsa
This should be interesting. I hope the two of you are succinct enough to do this properly.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
IntellectVsSpirit5000HaydTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: An interesting debate. Pro floods the debate with sources which is the opposite of what you want to do. You actually want to be able to use the sources and factor them into your debate. I have to give Sources to Con since he actually used all of his sources and effectively at that. On to the arguments. Pro provides multiple cases like Hitler and Stalin to show that Christianity is dangerous. Pro also drops Con's entire Opening arguments which is an automatic flow over to Con's side in this debate. Con refutes Pro's arguments multiple times and he even drops some of these points and moves on committing the Fallacy of the Shifting Goal post. With that I have to choice, but to award the arguments points and the debate to Con.
Vote Placed by FaustianJustice 2 years ago
FaustianJustice
IntellectVsSpirit5000HaydTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro starts the argument with a series of sinister people in history, some of which are given the title of atheist without foundation. Of the group, Stalin was not apparently atheistic, and Hitler wasn't either, at least according to sources. Further fallacy is employed on Con's 'sinister people' argument (that were self identified as Christian), and such is either dropped or refuted with by a No-True-Scotsman type rebuttal, or that because it was historic, its currently some how irrelevant. As it stands, Con was able to identify the fallacy, and directly note how atheism was fewer times the root cause of mass acts of violence. With Chairman Mao/ Pol Pot being the evidence of an atheistic violence being presented, leveraged against the mass of violence Christianity has instigated and been directly responsible for, it seems fitting that Con be awarded argumentation. Pro gets source points for being quantitatively the most as well as reliable, but not worthwhile to the debate.