The Instigator
TheMarketLibertarian
Pro (for)
The Contender
Millson
Con (against)

Religious Morality is invslid

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Debate Round Forfeited
Millson has forfeited round #2.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
00days00hours00minutes00seconds
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/9/2017 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 month ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 127 times Debate No: 105678
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (3)
Votes (0)

 

TheMarketLibertarian

Pro

Many relugious people claim that the only source of morality is religion- the resolution is that this is false. Religious Morality is false, and it is not the only source of objective morality.
Millson

Con

Salutations! This is my first debate so I'm excited about a respectful fun debate and thoughtful decision! I apologize ahead of time for the grammar and spelling.

I will convey my promise from a Protestant-Christan point of view.

1. Morality is from God
2. Having an Aethistc "morals" are not truly moral
3. Therefore, a set moral standard can only come from God.

Once again, thank you for this debate. Very interesting topic. It will be a good debate.
Debate Round No. 1
TheMarketLibertarian

Pro

The resolution of this debate is that morality is objective, that that morality does not require the existence of a God, and that morality derived from religious belief is false and invalid. Objective morality will be defined as an objectively proven set of standards whereby we can measure human behavior. Since these standards are not physical things like a rock or a pencil is a physical thing, but rather ideas, they cannot be proven in the physical realm but rather in the philosophical realm, using self evident rules and concepts.
I will prove objective morality through logic using Aristotle's 3 Classical Laws of Logic, these are:
1. The law of identity
Everything is equal to itself, 1=1, 2=2, and so on.
2. The law of non-contradiction:Truth does not contradict itself- if an idea is contradictory, it is false.
3. The law of no Middle:
Either something is or it isn't- either A is real or it is not. People have come up with a number of arguments against these, but these generally require some confusion about the claim in question- as long as their application is well defined, these laws cannot be worked around.

My opponent believes that morals cannot be objective if there is no God because he derives his standards from an anient book of fairy tales, and so he thinks tht the only possible source of morals is an ancient book of fairy tales. Because we atheists do not have any ancient book of fairy tales, he believes that we cannot have morals.

However, just because an ancient book of fairy tales says something does not mean that it is objective or true. And even if there were a God, how would his opinions be suddenly objective? If the source of morality is God, and it isn't, that would mean that morality is subject to God, and therefore subjective not objective.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 5
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by missmedic 1 month ago
missmedic
Your point is not lost in the misspelling, pleazz continu.
Posted by TheMarketLibertarian 1 month ago
TheMarketLibertarian
I've had trouble formatting my argument- I will do that soon.
Also, I originally misspelled the title as 'religious morality is invslid,' and I corrected that, but the website seems to have posted the incorrect spelling anyway- it's ridiculous.
Posted by missmedic 1 month ago
missmedic
An objective morality, is based on the facts of reality. All one needs in order to be objective is to refer to some facts of reality as source of moral judgments. A religious morality can not make moral progress.
Is it right to defend your life with deadly force? Why?
This debate has 6 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.