There is a Secular Slant to DDO
Debate Rounds (5)
The problem is one, you can't prove Atheism because it is a universal negative. In other words if God didn't exist, you'd have to know everything, which is impossible to prove. 
The next problem is that because you have faith in something, you're automatically wrong because faith is stupid. The Christian faith is well founded, but that's another debate. You can still be a philosopher. The definition of a philosopher is "a person who offers views or theories on profound questions in ethics, metaphysics, logic, and other related fields" according to Dictionary.com.  We have basic faith that there are other minds present, this world is real, your lover really loves you and science experiments are predictions of the future. 
Secularists are also guilty of the ad hominem logic. They attack arguments, organizations, and people because they are Christian. There is a double standard because Secular Progressive arguments, organizations, and people are considered true and immune from the Ad Hominem logic.  For instance....
"Oh, the Family Research Council is a Conservative Christian Organization and they have an agenda. Most of what they say is a lie. However, Think Progress is true because they are Secular Progressive."
Secularism is also considered a "neutral" position because it is free from theism. Simply taking a position on something doesn't make it neutral.  If someone says that their point is true because the other one is false without giving positive evidence for that other position, that is the false dilemma fallacy.  Simply saying that your position of Atheism is true because there's no good evidence for religion is shifting the burden of proof.  Atheists say that they are open minded, but deny that God exists. As mentioned before, that's scientifically unprovable and not open minded.  
http://gretachristina.typepad.com... (I'm using part of the article in the debate)
Even if there can be shown to be a slant, that does not, in and of itself, mean that it is unfair. That the top four debaters are secular (I am taking this as fact for the purpose of this debate, I did not check it.) does not prove a slant especially because you seem to concede that debaters themselves are more likely to be secular, and therefore, you will likely see more of them on the leaderboard.
You stated "The problem is one, you can't prove Atheism because it is a universal negative. In other words if God didn't exist, you'd have to know everything, which is impossible to prove."
This has nothing to do with the debate topic, but I will address it. You do not need to know everything to prove a negative. I can prove that I am not dead by listening to my pulse. I can prove that I am not African-American with a DNA test. While I myself have never seen conclusive evidence that God does not exist, and I fact believe very strongly in God, it doesn't mean that it is impossible.
Furthermore, secular arguments will appeal to a largely secular crowd, which you are likely to find on a debate site. It Is the mark of a good debater to take into account who his/her audience is and to appeal to them accordingly.
Therefore, if there is a slant, which you have not yet proven, I do not believe it is unfair.
Maryland_Kid forfeited this round.
A shame indeed.
I can prove it to you that there is a secular slant to DDO. The top 4 debaters are Secular with unrealistic winning percentages. (http://www.debate.org...).
First, Roy Latham, he's an Atheist. Winning percentage: 94.06%. http://www.debate.org...
Second, Danielle, she's Secular. Winning Percentage: 88.47% http://www.debate.org...
Third, Keptin, he's Agnostic. Winning Percentage: 95.57% http://www.debate.org...
Fourth, JustCallMeTarzan, he's an Atheist. Winning Percentage: 88.37%.
Then there's a person at fifth who's a Sciencetologist.
Sixth, there's TheSkeptic, who's an Atheist. Winning Percentage 84.81% http://www.debate.org...
Only number seven and eight are Christian. (Ore_Ele, and thett3)
The only time Christians or Fundamentalist Christians win arguments is when the Secular Progressive has an EXTREMELY bad argument like in this debate: http://www.debate.org... or here: http://www.debate.org...
On the opinion section, "Do You Have a Religion?" only 36% say yes (http://www.debate.org...) when according to several polls that's not true of the normal population. Only 21% said they did not have a religion which in this case means secular according to Gallup. http://www.gallup.com... According to the Pew Research Center, it's only 16.1% are unaffiliated (secular.) http://religions.pewforum.org...
Another opinion section piece is whether religion is rational. Only 33% said yes. http://www.debate.org...
The final piece of evidence is this opinion poll: "Is religion necessary in the modern world?" Only 32% said yes. http://www.debate.org...
No matter what the arguments are, Christians aren't treated fairly in this secular world or this site.
My opponent has indeed only proven my point. With a largely secular audience, any argument from a religious perspective would not appeal as well as another.
I am newer to this site, but look at my debates, unless the subject is by definition religious, I don't bring religion or scripture into it at all. If I was speaking in from of a group of nuns, I would have a Bible, Papal Encyclicals, and "the Lives of the Saints" on hand.
I have read some of the debates by the members you have listed and their arguments are impeccable.
I really just don't see a slant. Just that religious debaters seem to forget who their audience is.
Secularism appeals to pretty much everybody in this multi-cultured western society because everyone can easily agree with it. Sure, you can be passionate about your religion but how can you say yours is right?
Speaking as an Evangelical Protestant Christian, I see a lot of hate from believing the Bible as it is. A lot of things like the Global Flood and six, twenty four hour days of are not taken literally because of this secularism that is pushed on our culture. I'll give you some examples later. I just want to make a point and not count us out just because we're not Atheists. We can be smart and academic, too.
Much of this has to do with the fact that science has been taken over by secularists. People who come from broken homes tend to rate science as being more important than other careers. The harder the science, the bigger the percentage of Atheists according to the website GodandScience.org which was using a study by the University of California. It's not about who's smarter or more qualified. 
There are some biases related to texts of the Bible and what people believe is correct science.
First of all, many people on this site tend to think that Christians should accept the Theory of Evolution. Only 33 people, including myself, choose Creationism over the secular validating Theory of Evolution, out of 144 when I posted this.  56% voted for Christians to accept the Theory of Evolution even though it fundamentally violates Scripture. That includes everyone on this site of the possibility of voting.  However, according to Gallup, 46% of Americans believe in Young Earth Creationism. 
Second of all, there's the interpretation of the flood described in Genesis. The literal interpretation of that flood only got 17% of the votes on this website.  According to an ABC News Poll picked up by the Washington Times, 61% of Americans believe in the flood account really did happen. 
My point is not to believe not believe something because it is part of a faith or just because scientist interpret the evidence against it. Secularism is not default or neutral.
1. Secularists are overrepresented on this site compared to the general population.
2. Christians and other religious tend to argue from scripture, without necessarily backing it up scientifically.
3. A scriptural argument will not sway a secularist.
Maryland_Kid forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wiploc 3 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.