The Instigator
italia4356
Pro (for)
Winning
62 Points
The Contender
james94
Con (against)
Losing
61 Points

Taking the word GOD out of all things pertaining to government e.g. "pledge of alligence" dollar bil

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  
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: 11/7/2007 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 7,246 times Debate No: 52
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (161)
Votes (38)

 

italia4356

Pro

there should not be any mentioning of the word god when it comes to government. this is not one nation under god becaue i do not believe in god yet i am apart of this nation that i was born in. i herd that originally there was never any mentioning of god and that it was placed into our currency and our pledge of alliegence by some religious people, though i have no proof for that claim nor the desire right now to look it up but it sound right to me. wheather some people like it or not not everybody believe in god and they shouldnt be biased against for it. if you believe in god and dont want to accept my beliefs that is fine but a religious person has no more right to be here than i so they should not have their gods plastered all over my money and my pledge of alligence. I pledge alligence to the United States of America not to ur gods. i treat religious people fair so people who dont believe in god should be treated egual as well.
james94

Con

I here by find that the word god should be placed on the dollar bill and in the schools and the Pledge of Allegience as a tool of learning I think that children now days do not learn who he really is except in the church and Bible.

I find that most American people when asked if they believe in God they say yes. They believe that we are One Nation Under God.We are also equal as men and women.We are all God's children.
Debate Round No. 1
italia4356

Pro

Well you may think "that children now days do not learn who he really is except in the church and Bible" but I might think that children don't really learn who they are unless they pray to a Banana. That is your opinion.It is your right to have your opinion as it is my right to have mine so why should your opinion be on public money and public national anthems. You may believe this is one nation under god but I do not. So why should your opinion count more then mine when we are both American. I am not asking to put "one nation under atheism". If you believe in god that is perfectly fine with me but it is not fine that there should be your god all over my money, that is saying your opinion counts more then mine yet we are both Americans and in that case that is bias and discriminatory. You can do what ever you want, build as many churches as you want, pray as much as you want, it is perfectly ok with me but it is not ok when your opinions are plastered on my money, or the pledge of allegiance to my country or have to swear on your bible to whether or not I am telling the truth in a court of law. This is not the the united states of christians. There is supposed to be separation of church and state our founders understood this and it should be reimplemented.
james94

Con

Italia ,you still have not proven why we should take the word god out of everything pertaining to the government,and the dollar bill.Our founders have proven that we have the freedom of speech ,freedom of religion and freedom of government,also freedom of the press.If we were a communist country we would not have these freedoms.

I am not trying to be discriminative when I say that we should keep god on our dollar bill I am simply stating the fact that we are all equal in gods eyes.

You made a complaint that your opinion does not count as much as mine does , that is not true,because in America every opinion counts as equal.We as Americans have the freedom to do as we please within reason. This brings me to my next thought.

We are One Nation Under God ,which means that god is watching over us as humans.
Debate Round No. 2
italia4356

Pro

Yea but, James I don't believe in god brother. God whether you want to admit it or not is an opinion that is why you need faith to believe in it. Your opinion is all over my money. The dollar bill might as well say on it "atheists are stupid". James, what if the dollar bill said one nation under Atheism? Would that bother you? The only reason your not bothered is because the opinion is in you favor. Do you see my point? I am an American just like you are an American yet your beliefs trump mine and I don't think that is right.
james94

Con

Italia ,after careful thought it was brought to my attention that you have not been successful in backing up your statements as to why we should not put the word god on the dollar bill or in the government .That being said, Whether or not you are Atheist this has no bearing on whether or not to put the word god on things pertaining to the dollar bill or the government. Our constitution,was well documented by christian men who I spoke about in the previous round of this debate, about our freedoms.Whether you believe in god has no bearing on this debate .

You might read your history book about the constitution of the United States ,it will enlighten you to the fact that we should keep the word god on the dollar bill and everything pertaining to the government. Again I restate the fact that we are One Nation Under God.
Debate Round No. 3
italia4356

Pro

Well tell me this James, why "should" we put the word god on the dollar bill or in government?

"Whether you believe in god has no bearing on this debate".(james) James, in order for me to say the pledge of allegiance to my country from which I was born I have to pledge allegiance to your god. How does me not believing in god have any bearing on this debate?

Since we are all equal, and as you said we are all free, would you object to me asking congress to change the current pledge of allegiance from "one nation under god" to something like "one nation under Atheism"?

You have no more right to be here then I, so the fair thing to do would be to change motos such as "one nation under god" and "in god we trust" because those statements are not true for every person. Our founding fathers had no mentioning of creating a christian government in the constitution. They only spoke of religious freedom for which I am completely for. I found an interesting quote about one of the founding fathers and religion, " When Benjamin Franklin proposed during the Constitutional Convention that the founders begin each day of their labors with a prayer to God for guidance, his suggestion was defeated.(We are not one nation under god, David Greenburg)

I believe it is my responsibility to re establish the foundation from which was established by the founding fathers from which our country arose. Freedom, democracy, equality. When government favors some Americans religious views over another it creates division. We are not the christians of America we are the United States of America. Religion in government does not unite you and I it divides us. Our founding fathers realized that government should take no favor towards religion which is why in the first amendment it reads " "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof..." (The First Amendment)
The words "one nation under god" wasn't inserted till 1954. Government should be completely un biased and non supportive of any religion to ensure its place as the calm, neutral center that is there for all Americans not just those who believe in god. Lets be united.

Some History of pledge of allegiance, source from David Greenberg.
I did some reading on the history of the United States motto and the United States pledge of allegiance. It turns out that original pledge of allegiance had no mentioning of god. The pledge of allegiance was written in 1892 by the socialist Francis Bellamy, it went like this, "I pledge allegiance to my flag and the republic for which it stands, one nation indivisible, with liberty and justice for all". The words "under god" were added in 1954, more then 160 years after the official ratification of the constitution when Charles Oakan introduced a bill for doing just that.
james94

Con

Since you so lovingly bring up Atheism , let's address the topic. If what you are suggesting is right we have no freedoms at all. We should keep the word god on our dollar bill to remind us that we do have these rights and freedoms.

Atheism is not believing in the one who created and watches over you.On to my next point of view .

The constitution of America was written by our founding fathers one of which was our first president George Washington, and John Adams who were very influential at that time and place. The constitution was written so that people of this country would be free.Which brings me back to my main argument that you still havenot proven beyond a doubt why we should take the word god out of everything pertaining to the government or the dollar bill. Your theory makes me think of a communist or socialist point of view not of a point of view that is of freedom.

Atheism is as you have stated in previous rounds that One Nation Under Atheism,I find is an insult to us as Americans,because we are One Nation Under God. My main recommendation for you would be to open your mind instead of seeing one way.
Debate Round No. 4
italia4356

Pro

this debate suucks! what are you talking about james? Having the word god on the united states currency only says that the united states government supports a particular religion. god on the currency show bias against those who do not believe in god. government is supposed to be completely unbiased and neutral, that is the way it was formed over 160 years ago. the founding fathers new what were the problems of societies and new how to fix them which is why they did such a good job at building a foundation for this country to grow on which allowed United States to become one of the greatest countries in the world. But now 160 or so years later, with more corrupt government then ever, and a Texas aristocracy, the foundation to which our country was grown on is being changed. Our whole country is being turned into a bunch of hill billies by people like Bush.
What i always find ironic is if i said i believe in the boogy man, people would look at me like i'm crazy yet if i said I believe in an invisible man in the sky, and devils, and monsters beneath my feet, not only would i be looked at normal, but i could even use the fact that i believed in the devil monsters and god to aid me in becoming the president. I don't mean to be rude james but for the government to support a particular religion over another is wrong, government supporting a particular religion unconstitutional, and the only reason you support the government in it's decision to support a particular religion is a shameless reason, which is that the government happens to be supporting your religion. Don't you see james if the goverment supported my religious opinions then you would be the one upset and arguing. But since the goverment happens to be supporting your religion you are perfectly fine with it, that is why i say it is shamless. Year 2007 and we are having this debate, wow, what is happening to this country.
james94

Con

In conclusion I still fail to see your logic in taking the word god out of everything pertaining to the governnent and the dollar bill. You being Atheist
has no bearing to why we have the word god on the dollar bill.If it is just a word why should it offend you if it is on the dollar bill and in the government? which brings me to my next thought.

You said that this debate was a waste of time .This debate was very interesting and enlightening.I also feel that we as Americans are not biased to one thing or another .next thought please.

I want to explain myself to you to clarify what I meant when I last spoke about the constitution. WE as Americans should fight for what we think is right ,which is what our founding fathers did by implementing the Bill Of Rights.One of which are the Miranda Rights.

Thank You for this lively debate Italia, because maybe later we can be friends and discuss this topic in more detail.
Debate Round No. 5
161 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 11 through 20 records.
Posted by ladypoet 6 years ago
ladypoet
FOURTEENTH: The humanists are firmly convinced that existing acquisitive and profit-motivated society has shown itself to be inadequate and that a radical change in methods, controls, and motives must be instituted. A socialized and cooperative economic order must be established to the end that the equitable distribution of the means of life be possible. The goal of humanism is a free and universal society in which people voluntarily and intelligently cooperate for the common good. Humanists demand a shared life in a shared world.

(they want a new world order. A free market society isn't working...so we must move to socialism...LOL it worked so well before...NOT! Yes, I was taught this in school too)

FIFTEENTH AND LAST: We assert that humanism will: (a) affirm life rather than deny it; (b) seek to elicit the possibilities of life, not flee from them; and (c) endeavor to establish the conditions of a satisfactory life for all, not merely for the few. By this positive morale and intention humanism will be guided, and from this perspective and alignment the techniques and efforts of humanism will flow.

(except of course for the millions of babies murdered each year...they don't qualify in the humanism's idea of "affirming life rather than denying it")

Use facts... you remember...the research you claim your mother told you to do.

This crap is taught in public schools, some of it is passable, but I cannot tolerate the total accepted national religion taught in the public schools...it is wrong.
Posted by ladypoet 6 years ago
ladypoet
Continued:

ELEVENTH: Man will learn to face the crises of life in terms of his knowledge of their naturalness and probability. Reasonable and manly attitudes will be fostered by education and supported by custom. We assume that humanism will take the path of social and mental hygiene and discourage sentimental and unreal hopes and wishful thinking.

(Again, faith is useless, don't bother. Rely on education, and customs, but do NOT do these with faith. That is what I was taught in the public schools)

TWELFTH: Believing that religion must work increasingly for joy in living, religious humanists aim to foster the creative in man and to encourage achievements that add to the satisfactions of life.

(great, sounds good. Taught this in school too. However, how am I to get in touch with my creative and satisfaction if a huge part of my creativity and satisfaction come from my relationship with God...which is not allowed expression in the public schools)

THIRTEENTH: Religious humanism maintains that all associations and institutions exist for the fulfillment of human life. The intelligent evaluation, transformation, control, and direction of such associations and institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions with a view to the enhancement of human life is the purpose and program of humanism. Certainly religious institutions, their ritualistic forms, ecclesiastical methods, and communal activities must be reconstituted as rapidly as experience allows, in order to function effectively in the modern world.

(so, reform religion so it fits with the modern world...taught that in school as well.)
Posted by ladypoet 6 years ago
ladypoet
Continued:

SIXTH: We are convinced that the time has passed for theism, deism, modernism, and the several varieties of "new thought".

(I was definately taught that in school...drilled into me mostly)

SEVENTH: Religion consists of those actions, purposes, and experiences which are humanly significant. Nothing human is alien to the religious. It includes labor, art, science, philosophy, love, friendship, recreation — all that is in its degree expressive of intelligently satisfying human living. The distinction between the sacred and the secular can no longer be maintained.

(So we must just swirl it all together and call it what we will...no distinction between secularism and religion???)

EIGHTH: Religious Humanism considers the complete realization of human personality to be the end of man's life and seeks its development and fulfillment in the here and now. This is the explanation of the humanist's social passion.

(this was taught in biology. That there is no proof of anything after this life, so enjoy it while you can...because that is it)

NINTH: In the place of the old attitudes involved in worship and prayer the humanist finds his religious emotions expressed in a heightened sense of personal life and in a cooperative effort to promote social well-being.

(well, they did away with prayer, and inserted mandatory service. While I think service without pay is a great and wonderful thing, when it is mandatory...it becomes slavery)

TENTH: It follows that there will be no uniquely religious emotions and attitudes of the kind hitherto associated with belief in the supernatural.

(This was definately taught. No prayer, because it is useless and only insults atheists...so be quiet and don't pray)
Posted by ladypoet 6 years ago
ladypoet
I agree humanism should not be taught in schools...but it is. It was taught in my school, and is taught in the public schools children go to today.

Here are their basic beliefs from their website:

FIRST: Religious humanists regard the universe as self-existing and not created.

(what part of that didn't you learn in science class?)

SECOND: Humanism believes that man is a part of nature and that he has emerged as a result of a continuous process.

(this is the evolution you were speaking of...were you not taught that in class?)

THIRD: Holding an organic view of life, humanists find that the traditional dualism of mind and body must be rejected.

FOURTH: Humanism recognizes that man's religious culture and civilization, as clearly depicted by anthropology and history, are the product of a gradual development due to his interaction with his natural environment and with his social heritage. The individual born into a particular culture is largely molded by that culture.

(I was taught this in class...weren't you?)

FIFTH: Humanism asserts that the nature of the universe depicted by modern science makes unacceptable any supernatural or cosmic guarantees of human values. Obviously humanism does not deny the possibility of realities as yet undiscovered, but it does insist that the way to determine the existence and value of any and all realities is by means of intelligent inquiry and by the assessment of their relations to human needs.

(that last bit, I actually agree with, but I think too many times they disreguard so many things of value because it doesn't fit their mold...that is a tragedy...this is taught in public schools)
Posted by Tatarize 6 years ago
Tatarize
We have rights. We need not be given them. Yes, the DoI does make the case that rights some rights are God given. Really they aren't given, they are simply possessed. There's a good amount of theory on the subject. Suffice it to say that justification isn't really important so long as the rights are respected they exist. Borrowing from Locke, Jefferson wrote his reasonings accordingly. However, suffice it to say that the DoI isn't binding law or even a statement of law. It's a petition for a redress of grievances (another first amendment right).

As for the mention of "God" and "Lord", that says "IN THE YEAR OF OUR LORD" -- AD! It's a fricking date!

"Done in Convention by the Unanimous Consent of the States present the Seventeenth Day of September in the Year of our Lord one thousand seven hundred and Eighty seven and of the Independence of the United States of America the Twelfth."

The 20th amendment makes clear reference to the god Janus!
"The terms of the President and Vice President shall end at noon on the 20th day of January," -- Janus' month is clearly referenced! They dated it in AD? Oh, they must demand a belief in God.

The theory of rights at the time didn't call for man or state given rights. It still doesn't.

Humanism isn't taught in the schools. And shouldn't be. However, humanist ethics are everywhere and certainly worthy of being taught.

This country isn't Christian, even in name.

You don't seem to understand the basics of our governments, the origins of the ideas, even how the treasury works, the laws and amendments, how dating systems don't endorse religion, economic theory, schools, and on top of that, you seem naive about how the world really works.
Posted by Tatarize 6 years ago
Tatarize
We are not in agreement. You are making factually false statements about the mint and treasury, and the federal reserve. The mint prints money not the fed. The mint is part of the treasury and the treasury is government.

Nothing in the constitution says money need be backed by anything. However, the first amendment establishment clause does say you can't respect and establishment of religion (such as God) (Everson, Lemon, etc).

Secondly, give me all your money. Seriously, worthless. Done. Hand it over. I value your 20 dollars to be worth 20 dollars. If you value it as worthless then you should jump at it, ill even give you some real stuff for it (value $.02). The Fed doesn't make money. They control some lending to banks and try to control the economy a bit.

What about those of us who are in debt? Our debt later on is worth less because of inflation. Frankly, poor people benefit a lot. And invest your money in stocks (recommended) or gold (not recommendable). Don't save up dollar bills: spend them.

The FED DOESN'T PRINT MONEY!

We don't encourage people to go into debt, they do that. And inflation helps them. Nobody ever advocated going into debt, nobody has to. I'm glad you think debt should be paid ASAP, where the hell do broke and in debt people get money to pay the debt? Should they starve and not go into debt in the first place? You just seem naive.

You can and do have freedom of religion and from religion. And you obviously can because you do. You don't have freedom from other people's religions spouted by them. The STATE cannot do that. THE STATE! PEOPLE ARE NOT THE STATE! YOU ARE ALLOWED TO PRAY IN PUBLIC! THE STATE IS NOT ALLOWED TO ENDORSE YOU, PREVENT YOU, OR FORCE YOU! Freedom of and from religion. Ain't it grand?!

We are allowed to mention God all we want. The government isn't allowed to endorse such statements. The DoI gave foundational support against a king, which required a little bit of God theft from divine right.
Posted by ladypoet 6 years ago
ladypoet
Who gives us our rights? Governement? The founders believed (and said so in the Declaration):

"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness." ~ Declaration of Independence

Why would they mention God, and our Lord (Article VII in the Constitution) if they did not want the mear mention of God allowed in public for fear of offending atheists?

Some of you claim on here that the founders were atheists...yet they wrote this document and many others proclaiming our rights were given by God, not man, not government.

The Declaration was written by Thomas Jefferson...unless they have changed the history books again. LOL

Humanism is taught in government owned public schools. Read the manifesto and you'll see it's the very same things most kids were/are taught in school about most things.

It's sort of a little secret that nobody talks about, but it is the national religion. This country is Christian in name only. More are taught the religion of humanism through public school, than those taught the bible, the Quran, the Torah etc... by parents and schools combined.
Posted by ladypoet 6 years ago
ladypoet
I think we are in general agreement, but you seem bent on being offended by me.

Tell me what is Constitutional about a system that prints money (saying "In God We Trust") on it, and it isn't backed by anything. It is worthless. It benefits a small population (those that own the federal reserve) and the rest of us deal with saving money that has no value later on...or at least is worth much less later on, because of inflation.

The government is dependent on the federal reserve, and they aren't going to cause a stir by taking "in God We Trust" off the money.

You did have a point on the debt going down with inflation, but I don't think we should encourage people to go into credit card debt, just because it will be easier to pay it off later because of inflation. Any kind of debt is bad, and is best paid of ASAP.

You cannot have freedom of religion and freedom from religion at the same time. If I want to pray in public, I am infringing on your right to not be exposed to religion ever, if I am not allowed by the almighty government to pray in public, then my right to freedom of religion without government interference is gone. You cannot have both.

Why does the Declaration mention God so many times, if we are not allowed to mention Him?
Posted by Tatarize 6 years ago
Tatarize
The separation of church and state does not require private citizens from doing anything. Frankly, you could go to great lengths to convert people preaching hell fire and doomsday and how homosexuals are evil and abortion is murder. The Bill of Rights are prohibitions set on the government. For example the government has no right to dictate a religious opinion. And guess what? "In God We Trust" is a religious opinion dictated by the state. The first amendment doesn't require "us" to give up anything no matter if it is offensive. It requires that the government cannot make a law respecting an establishment of religion.

The first amendment allows us the freedom, in that, the government will stay the hell away from the issue. It also allows us freedom from religion, in that, the state has no right to make dictations. You are given freedom of religion and from religion as far as the state is concerned.

The government cannot tell me how to worship or what to believe. However, telling me that 'We Trust God' is the government dictating that my religious opinions are wrong. That's not allowed. And is as prohibited as the government telling people "There is no God."

Separation of church and state was the intention of the first amendment and established as the intention of the establishment clause in Everson supreme court decision. There is no national religion, though humanism would be nice, that isn't allowed and shouldn't be. The government simply has no say in the matter.

Nothing I said mentioned income tax. I'm generally of the opinion that too many things are lumped into property taxes. The poor don't pay much in the way of taxes and generally will get back some credits and monies if they file. And certainly couldn't pay for school themselves. And children of poor parents should be given the best chances they have available to them.
Posted by ladypoet 6 years ago
ladypoet
Tatarize-you really can't believe that?

You are just going off of income tax...which is a joke.

If you know any investors, ask them if they pay taxes on their rentals...if so, do they pay it out of pocket, or roll it into the rent costs? They actually charge it as part of the rent, because any successful business person will not eat the taxes on any property.

That is only one portion of the taxes for education. Others are taxes on anything you purchase. We pay for taxes for education (on everyday things) than most people can imagine.

The poor get the short end of the stick with crappy schools and pay taxes that they don't even realize go to pay for those crappy schools...schools which keep the poor in their place. They just make the problem last one more generation.
38 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Shadow4155 4 months ago
Shadow4155
italia4356james94Tied
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:61 
Vote Placed by ldebaterpatel 5 years ago
ldebaterpatel
italia4356james94Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:32 
Vote Placed by ghegeman 5 years ago
ghegeman
italia4356james94Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Vote Placed by Ineffablesquirrel 6 years ago
Ineffablesquirrel
italia4356james94Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Zerosmelt 6 years ago
Zerosmelt
italia4356james94Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 6 years ago
TheSkeptic
italia4356james94Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by PoeJoe 6 years ago
PoeJoe
italia4356james94Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by wedoada 6 years ago
wedoada
italia4356james94Tied
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 
Vote Placed by DaltonDem 6 years ago
DaltonDem
italia4356james94Tied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 6 years ago
Tatarize
italia4356james94Tied
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:30