The Instigator
DCSandman
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Danielle
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

In order for democracy to develop across the world monotheism must cease

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/17/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,991 times Debate No: 11778
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

DCSandman

Pro

Their is one difference between the ancient democracies and the modern democracies, that is the the latter have been extremely influence by the monotheistic religions. Monotheistic religions cannot go hand in hand with democracies since they themselves teach monarchy. and thus for true democracy to develop more democratic, polytheistic, existentialistic philosophies must replace the monotheistic religions world wide, especially in the U.S., the so called leader of the free world.
Danielle

Con

Democracy is a system of political government carried out either directly by the people (direct democracy) or by means of elected representatives, known as a representative democracy [1]. Monotheism is the belief that only one God exists; examples of monotheistic religions include Christianity, Judaism, Islam, etc. I will begin my argument by noting that nowhere under a description of monotheism have I come across the assertion that monotheists or monotheism in general favors one political leader over a democracy [2]. Instead, any "divine ruler" mentioned in sacred monotheistic books most likely refers to either Jesus - who is meant to be a spiritual King and not a political King - or men like King David and King Solomon whom scholars refer to as part of the united monarchy [3]. These ancient monarchies are important to religious scholars; however, have little to no relevance regarding religion and the political systems they propose today.

Consider, for instance, the Augustinian doctrine of the Two Cities. Augustine discussed the City of God (heaven) vs. the City of Man (earth) and noted that no political system would ever be able to afford perfect justice; for that is reserved for heaven. However, he notes that we should accept political arrangements that secure peace without overly emphasizing temporal justice, and emphasize social justice as democracy tends to do [4]. Indeed, St. Augustine held a profound "endorsement of small republics for their closer approximation to a justice on earth. Augustine in various instances praises the ancient republican ideal for its attempt to constrain human ambitions, particularly the cravings for empire and expansion of material wealth. He spoke admiringly of the conception of 'commonwealth' animated by 'a common sense of right,' including the virtues of self-rule, mutual restraint, and an abiding regard for other humans" [5].

As you can see, a monotheistic religion like Christianity does not argue in favor of complete and total monarchy. In fact, many times throughout history did the Bible and other books refer to unjust Kings who needed to be dethroned. At best, monotheism promotes theocracy: an interwoven society governed by religion, or with religion setting the basis for laws and cultural behavior. However, most religious people acknowledge that not everybody is religious let alone adheres to their particular beliefs. Even monotheists are divided into three distinct factions. Clearly Christians do not intend on following Islamic laws, either legal or cultural. Therefore the only way for these three religions to coexist would be to respect each other's beliefs, and leave religion as one aspect of life while public policy is another.

Furthermore, let's look at the concept of democracy itself and what it promotes. I'll begin by pointing out that not everyone favors a democratic government, and that there are an abundant amount of criticisms regarding democracy itself meaning it should not automatically be accepted as an ideal. However, I will simply be refuting the resolution and not arguing either in favor or aainst democracy; I will simply be showing how democracy can fully be integrated with monotheism or vice versa. Anyway, either under a direct democracy or representative democracy, one is allowed to endorse their religious beliefs with their vote. For instance, a monotheist is typically pro-life and anti-abortion. Instead of allowing their beliefs to trump politics, they are each given a vote just as every other person is given a vote, and thus anti monotheistic policies can indeed come into fruition even with monotheists having a say in government.

Similarly, even if the majority of voters are monotheists, democracies still work to ensure that there is no tyranny of the majority in a democratic society [6]. In other words, simply because monotheists exist does not mean that their policy will take over. More importantly, Pro's suggestion that monotheism must cease in order for democracy to function properly is a direct contradiction of democracy itself and what it represents. A democracy is supposed to give each person the opportunity to advance their values in their own self-interest, INCLUDING those who wish to promote monotheism or its values. Trying to eliminate this belief is ignoring their right in a democratic society to participate in government the way that they see fit.

In conclusion, I have proven that (1) monotheism isn't against democracy; (2) a true democracy acknowledges monotheistic voters; and (3) democracies CAN function with monotheism in place. It is Pro's burden to prove otherwise. Thank you and good luck!

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] http://plato.stanford.edu...
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[4] http://findarticles.com...
[5] http://findarticles.com...
[6] http://www.garlikov.com...
Debate Round No. 1
DCSandman

Pro

DCSandman forfeited this round.
Danielle

Con

Please extend my arguments.
Debate Round No. 2
DCSandman

Pro

DCSandman forfeited this round.
Danielle

Con

Unfortunately my opponent did not return to defend any of his views, or argue against any of mine. For this reason I encourage a vote for the Con in all areas you deem necessary; for me it will be all of them. I would like to thank my opponent for extending this opportunity to me anyway and I'll wish him luck in the voting period. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
Thank you, Freeman!

RFD: See debate.
Posted by Freeman 6 years ago
Freeman
Oh Lwerd, you destroy your opponents so wonderfully. :)
Posted by Puck 6 years ago
Puck
Erm ... A monarchy is a system of inherited rulership of a prestige family - Kings and Queens etc. I think you mean theocracy.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 5 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
DCSandmanDanielleTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Arguments to Con for forfeit. Conduct to Pro because Con voted for herself.
Vote Placed by Danielle 6 years ago
Danielle
DCSandmanDanielleTied
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