The Instigator
Just-Your-Average-Atheist
Pro (for)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
Magic8000
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

Idiot debate: The hatred of atheists.

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 8 votes the winner is...
Magic8000
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/19/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,881 times Debate No: 32699
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (8)

 

Just-Your-Average-Atheist

Pro

The format is simple; introduction, rebuttal, conclusion. We will be debating idiotically about the subject of why people hate atheists. If you take it seriously, you lose. The stance that will be defended by me in this idiot debate; when people are rejected, they usually feel a bit of anger.

They may even feel hatred towards the rejector. People whom hold god close enough have a feel that atheists reject them by rejecting their god- for it is a projection of their version of the perfect being, coming from deep within them.
Magic8000

Con

The position I'm defending is that atheists are hated because we're so fat and love raping.

Very religious Americans are more likely to be healthier than atheists [1]. No one likes fat people. I mean Jesus if the entire world was fat we'd pull the Earth down. The sidewalks would be cracked and children would be lost in belly fat. I'm eating a whole cake right now attempting to get heavier because I don't believe in God.

Rape

Atheism itself makes no moral statements. Meaning it doesn't say rape is wrong, meaning it's saying rape is fine. After I type this I'm going to attempt a rape while eating some cake.

On the right of the debate is a video of atheist Dan Barker saying he loves to rape.



[1] http://www.gallup.com...
Debate Round No. 1
Just-Your-Average-Atheist

Pro

If atheists love to rape, then why is the sky blue? Didn't think of that one did you?

And all atheists are fat? Their cake consummation can only be large enough to make them fat if potatoes grew above ground.

You may say these things are unrelated, but I have one statement for you; Potatoes are in direct correlation with atheist obesity. Oh, I forgot to mention that if atheists raped, the sky would be black with condemnation.[1]

[1]: www.debate.org/Just-Your-Average-Atheist/
Magic8000

Con


Rape


Pro gives us the age old blue sky rape problem. This problem was proposed by Hitler in the 1940s and solved by professor Mike Hawk in the 1930s.


Dr. Hawk said the reason why the sky is blue is because the atheist eat so many babies. The gas from the babies is excreted by the atheists, accumulating in the atmosphere causing a blue sky effect.


Fat


Nietzsche is the one genetically modified potatoes to grow above ground. Nietzsche was asked why he did such a thing, he said “I did it for the lulz!” [1]. The atheistic cake consumption and potato correlation doesn't take into account various things


1. Colorless green ideas sleeping furiously.


2. Potatoes that are held and torchered by the US government or by Dan Barker.


3. North Korea raising potatoes for slave labor


and much more


Con's argument


Con makes the following argument


...when people are rejected, they usually feel a bit of anger. They may even feel hatred towards the rejector. People whom hold god close enough have a feel that atheists reject them by rejecting their god- for it is a projection of their version of the perfect being, coming from deep within them.


The problem is, he claims that theists project themselves onto the atheist. However humans aren't made of light. How can they project? Projectors cost money, but being a theist doesn't cost money. Atheists would be blinded if projection theory is true! Where would the projector even go? Believe me I've tried to insert projectors in my body, I couldn't do it! It was funny explaining it to the doctor.



Sources



[1] Nietzsche, Fred. “Sie Ihre Zeit verschwendet, um diese zu übersetzen“ page 123



Debate Round No. 2
Just-Your-Average-Atheist

Pro

I will rebut my opponents arguments using simple logic.



Sky is blue

The problem of the sky still stands because babies only excrete brown solids and yellow liquids[1] which both taste bad. [2]



Fat

Hitler opposed my view. He was also a cat rapist. Everybody knows only cat rapists oppose this view. Nit was too. He claimed to do this to try and make cat racism a professional thing.[3] Fact: nit and hitler were the leaders of the holocaust, creating it because a Jewish person found them raping cats. [4]



Sources:

1: Sandusky, Jerry, Babies during rape. 2012
2: My taste buds
3: Hitler, adolf, The great trick and why cat rape rules. 1932
4: Hitler, adolf, Why cat rape is good and Jews are bad. 1935
Magic8000

Con


Thanks to Pro. This is one of the most intellectual debates I've ever been in. Pro says he's refuting my arguments with simple logic. John Irving said


“Logic doesn't exist” - John Irving [1]. He's not a philosopher at all, but it's true.


Blue Sky


Babies do excrete brown solids and yellow liquids, however in the sky they look blue because of potato mechanics and Biebs theorem. [2]


Fat


It's disputed that Hitler raped cats. Many historians are now claiming that Hitler actually raped evil and was actually doing the Jews a favor [3]. The historical consensus is coming up that yes Hitler was good and only raped evil. Cats can no longer have any affects on potatoes. Since the rise of cat skinned, cats learned not to mess with the potatoes [4].


My arguments stand


Sources


[1] Irving John. Silly quotes


[2] Bieber Justin. Baby.


[3] http://www.debate.org...


^ Famous Historian


[4] Biologist Hovind Kent. Evolution of Cats.


Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by masterdebater6969 4 years ago
masterdebater6969
idk, i would have sex with all good looking women. even if they have only 9 toes.
Posted by jdog2016 4 years ago
jdog2016
"He did it for the lulz"
Posted by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
Thanks :). Glad to take a break from serious debates. It was fun
Posted by Just-Your-Average-Atheist 4 years ago
Just-Your-Average-Atheist
Give con a point for grammar and conduct as well as arguments. He deserves it.
Posted by Just-Your-Average-Atheist 4 years ago
Just-Your-Average-Atheist
Congrats magic. I hope later in the series of idiot debates, I can host your brilliance again.
Posted by Chase200mph 4 years ago
Chase200mph
Now that makes Purrrrfect sense.
Posted by Just-Your-Average-Atheist 4 years ago
Just-Your-Average-Atheist
I meant cat rape not cat racism. I misspelled it and was autocorrected.
Posted by Just-Your-Average-Atheist 4 years ago
Just-Your-Average-Atheist
I forgot there were three rounds. Thought there were five. Think that makes you win.
Posted by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
Ahhh you got me!! I'm really a reverse poe!
Posted by Chase200mph 4 years ago
Chase200mph
Auhhh man, are you just an agnostic in atheist clothing? : ) LOL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by JonMilne 4 years ago
JonMilne
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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: Excellent parody debate. Con wins it for me via being considerably more hilarious especially with the blue sky rape problem remark and his bringing up of Hitler and his usage of Justin Bieber as a source.
Vote Placed by jdog2016 4 years ago
jdog2016
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: WTF did I just read!?!
Vote Placed by Chase200mph 4 years ago
Chase200mph
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: I voted down the middle because it confused me, both sides made too much sense to be in the religious debating area....
Vote Placed by x2MuzioPlayer 4 years ago
x2MuzioPlayer
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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 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: This just made my day. While I thought both had very interesting sources, Con's source to Anti-Atheist's page just about killed me. Pro said I should also give S&G and conduct to Con, so sure, there ya go.
Vote Placed by Controverter 4 years ago
Controverter
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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: Con was terrible.
Vote Placed by Pennington 4 years ago
Pennington
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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 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: Adjusting vb
Vote Placed by thewhitespoon 4 years ago
thewhitespoon
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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: atheism is wrong
Vote Placed by SuperiorArsenal 4 years ago
SuperiorArsenal
Just-Your-Average-AtheistMagic8000Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: If the winner is the more hilarious, then Con gets the point for arguments. I mean, "Pro gives us the age old blue sky rape problem" is just pure gold.