The Instigator
Matt_L
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
1970vu
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Christians should say the Pledge of Allegiance to America.

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 4 votes the winner is...
Matt_L
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/30/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,314 times Debate No: 43135
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

Matt_L

Con

I do not believe that Christians should pledge their allegiance to America.

Round one is merely for acceptance.

As the Bible is what a Christian should base his/her decisions on, I will be using it as my main source and would ask that whoever accepts this debate would be willing to do the same.
1970vu

Pro

Okay I accept this debate. You should change the debate title to Christians should not say the Pledge of Allegiance to America.
Debate Round No. 1
Matt_L

Con

Thanks for accepting, I look forward to an interesting debate.

Firstly: whether or not this debate is entitled 'Christians should not say the pledge' or 'Christians should say the pledge' does not, in fact, change the scope of the debate. I would still be arguing against Christians saying the pledge and 1970vu would still be arguing against me.

Anyway... On to the actual debate!

I'm going to start by defining some of the terms that I will focus on. (All definitions from http://dictionary.reference.com... )

1) Pledge- A solemn promise or agreement to do or refrain from doing something

2) Allegiance- Loyalty or devotion to some person, group, cause, or the like.

3) Oath- A formally affirmed statement or promise accepted as an equivalent of an appeal to a deity or to a revered person or thing; affirmation.

As I stated in round one, I will be using the Bible as my main source.
The first passage I would like to bring up is Matthew 5:33-37 in which Jesus says: "Again you have heard that it was said to those of old, "You shall not swear falsely, but shall perform to the Lord what you have sworn." But I say to you, Do not take an oath at all, either by heaven, for it is the throne of God, or by the earth, for it is his footstool, or by Jerusalem, for it is the city of the great King. And do not take an oath by your head, for you cannot make one hair white or black. Let what you say be simply "Yes" or "No"; anything more than this comes from evil."

We see here that Jesus clearly says not to take Oaths. A Pledge, as seen in the definitions, can easily be called an oath and have the same meaning. Based on this, a Christian should not pledge themselves to any country, which, of course, includes America.

SIDE NOTE: I want to make it clear to everyone reading this debate and to my opponent that I believe in supporting your country. I believe that Christians are supposed to support their fellow humans, which includes supporting the societies/countries in which mankind exists.
1970vu

Pro

The Bible commands Christians to be good citizens of the country in which they live. He has set civil governments over all people. In Romans 13:1, the apostle Paul stated that every Christian should "be subject unto the higher powers." However, we understand that our foremost allegiance is to God.
We pledge allegiance to our flag (or to the nation it represents) only to the extent that the civil government does not require us to disobey God"s laws, either deliberately or inadvertently (Acts 5:29).
A related question arises, concerning whether it is proper to salute the flag. Some consider this a form of idolatry. Saluting the flag is merely a way of showing respect, and is not of and by itself an act of worship. God commands us, in Romans 13:1-7, to show honor and respect where they are deserved. We salute the flag not because it represents another god, but because it symbolizes the many blessings"freedom being just one"that the Eternal God has bestowed upon one"s nation.
It is not wrong for people to pledge allegiance to their nation, as that nation attempts to provide for the security and general welfare of its citizens (however imperfectly), and strives to foster international peace. Again, Christians are to be subject to the laws of the higher powers (Rom. 13:1), as long as such laws are not in conflict with God"s laws. Just as we pay taxes and comply with the laws of the land, we should also render honor and respect where it is due.
Debate Round No. 2
Matt_L

Con

Pro says that "we pledge allegiance to our flag (or to the nation it represents) only to the extent that the civil government does not require us to disobey God"s laws, either deliberately or inadvertently (Acts 5:29)." This, however, is not true allegiance. Pledging your allegiance means pledging your self COMPLETELY to something. The Bible says "No one can serve two masters. Either you will hate the one and love the other, or you will be devoted to the one and despise the other." (Matthew 6:24) This means that you can not split up your devotion between a country and Yahweh. The allegiance of a Christian, by definition, has already been given to Christ and can therefore not be given to anything else.

If a person is true to his or her oath of allegiance to America (which the average person has given dozens of times), then no matter what America decides to do, that person must support the decision or break their oath. The person that breaks the oath has, consequently, been living a life of deceit towards America. However, if that person had followed the words of Jesus as recorded in Matthew, then their life of lies would never have been. Instead, they would have been living a life, not drenched in deceitful pledges, but one dedicated to Yahweh.
1970vu

Pro

Can you explain to me why Christians have petioned the Government to make kids say the Pledge of Alliegance as shown by George H W Bush and others?
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Before voting, please read: http://www.wicwiki.org.uk...

In essence the S&G shifts in pro's case, are because difference pieces of his argument are copy/pasted from non-cited and non-quoted sources. The above link being just one of them. The section "It is not wrong for people to pledge allegiance to their nation, as that nation attempts to provide for the security and general welfare of its citizens (however imperfectly)," can be found within both his R2 case, and the link provided.
Posted by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
@sungod97: No, you're trying to say anyone outside of America isn't human.
Posted by sungod97 3 years ago
sungod97
Are you trying to say one's religion is more important than humanity?
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Timelord48 3 years ago
Timelord48
Matt_L1970vuTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by TheUser 3 years ago
TheUser
Matt_L1970vuTied
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: No effort visible by Pro.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
Matt_L1970vuTied
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: CONDUCT: Plagiarism. S&G: Just terrible, whenever it was not being copy/pasted from other people. ARGUMENTS: Con's case is unchallenged even if the plagiarism was accepted as arguments, he tried to use the final round for cross examination (when con could no longer respond). SOURCES: The missing links (not to mention quotation marks), greatly hurt con in this area.
Vote Placed by MassiveDump 3 years ago
MassiveDump
Matt_L1970vuTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: In Round 2, Con showed a better interpretation of the Bible. An example to back this up would include the fact that Pro pointed out that Christians are subject to laws, when it's not against the law not to pledge to the flag. And then there's Round 3. Pro, what the hell were you trying to prove? Because of that, I gave conduct to Con because there is absolutely no way Pro was putting forth a full effort. This also improved the argument point for Con because Pro basically dropped everything.