The Instigator
Maryland_Kid
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Weiler
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

There is a Secular Slant to DDO

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Weiler
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/29/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 739 times Debate No: 38270
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)

 

Maryland_Kid

Pro

There is an unfair slant on DDO against fundamental Christian theists. Look at the top four debaters: they're all secular. I'd also like to point out that a lot of debates involving secularism vs. theism, the secularist won despite bad arguments. I theorize that many people interested in debating are more likely to be secularists rather than atheists.

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. [1]

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. [2] 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. [3]

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. [4] 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. [5] 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. [6] Simply saying that your position of Atheism is true because there's no good evidence for religion is shifting the burden of proof. [7] Atheists say that they are open minded, but deny that God exists. As mentioned before, that's scientifically unprovable and not open minded. [8] [9]

[1]http://carm.org...
[2]http://dictionary.reference.com...
[3]http://ingles.homeunix.net...
[4]http://www.nizkor.org...
[5]http://creation.com...
[6]http://www.nizkor.org...
[7]http://www.nizkor.org...
[8]http://gretachristina.typepad.com... (I'm using part of the article in the debate)
[9]http://creation.com...
Weiler

Con

First you stated "There is an unfair slant on DDO against fundamental Christian theists. Look at the top four debaters: they're all secular. I'd also like to point out that a lot of debates involving secularism vs. theism, the secularist won despite bad arguments. I theorize that many people interested in debating are more likely to be secularists rather than atheists."

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.
Debate Round No. 1
Maryland_Kid

Pro

Maryland_Kid forfeited this round.
Weiler

Con

Doth my opponent concede?

A shame indeed.
Debate Round No. 2
Maryland_Kid

Pro

No, I don't. I've been really busy with school. One day, I studied all day.

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.
Weiler

Con

I am happy to see my opponent return to the debate.

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.
Debate Round No. 3
Maryland_Kid

Pro

Thank you for that kind response.

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. [1]

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. [2] 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. [3] However, according to Gallup, 46% of Americans believe in Young Earth Creationism. [4]

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. [5] According to an ABC News Poll picked up by the Washington Times, 61% of Americans believe in the flood account really did happen. [6]

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]http://www.godandscience.org...
[2]http://www.debate.org...
[3]http://www.debate.org...
[4] http://www.gallup.com...
[5] http://www.debate.org...
[6] http://www.washingtontimes.com...
Weiler

Con

My opponent is again proving my point.

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.
Debate Round No. 4
Maryland_Kid

Pro

Maryland_Kid forfeited this round.
Weiler

Con

Perhaps the slant is against people who keep FFing?
Debate Round No. 5
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by RoyLatham 3 years ago
RoyLatham
Voting is over, but for what it is worth I think Con conceded arguments in R4. Suppose the debate resolution was, "DDO has a slant against the theory the earth if flat." The resolution is, of course, true -- and it is also fair that that is the case. Con argued that the slant to secularism is fair, and that's true. Con correctly points out that debates are about issues that can be argued based upon facts and logic. Matters of faith are only debatable when an article of faith poses a potential conflict with the observed world. when that happens, the facts of the world have a strong advantage in a debate.

That the top few debaters are secular doesn't say much one way or the other about the site as a whole. The site demographics show about a third of members are atheists or agnostics, half are believers, and rest don't say. http://www.debate.org... Only about a quarter of Christians as a whole are fundamentalists. There have been about 30,000 debates on DDO, but only 3700 in the religion category. Fairly often, religious debates put one religious belief against another.
Posted by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
Conduct for forfeits.

Pro had a strong argument: So many of our top debaters are secular. He undermines this a tad by counting scientologists as secular.

Con deals with this by saying that that those debaters are really good; they win because they are skilled, not because of their religious postures.

Con also suggests that religious people tend not to argue in a manner persuasive to a secular audience. If you say something is in the bible, for instance, theists tend to take that as proof, while the rest of us are still waiting for evidence. It's an interesting theory.

I don't find either argument to be compelling. Both sides seem to believe that DDO has a lot of secularists, which I found interesting.

As Con pointed out, Pro went off topic a lot. And he dropped arguments, if nothing else by forfeiting repeatedly.

While Pro raised an interesting point, Con had equally interesting counter-points. I don't think Pro proved his case. Since Pro had the burden of proof, I'm calling it for Con.
Posted by Maryland_Kid 3 years ago
Maryland_Kid
Sorry about all the forfeiting. I'm guessing I should just debate when I have the time.
Posted by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
The debaters shouldn't add to their arguments in the comments. That's while the debate and voting is going on. After the voting closes, feel free.
Posted by Maryland_Kid 3 years ago
Maryland_Kid
First of all, I've been very busy with school so it was an accident that I forfeited round 2. Second of all, you can't prove a universal negative. There can never be a God. How do you know? You can't. You'd have to know everything. Third of all, I did post in the forums about this. I don't think it got any replies.
Posted by Sitara 3 years ago
Sitara
You can prove a negative. I say I do not have a penis. You do not believe me, so I drop my drawers and prove it. Conclusion: you can prove a negative. Also, stop whining! It is not unfair for people to express their beliefs. If you want to even the score, get more religious people on here.
Posted by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
Your resolution is that DDO has a secular slant, so most of your post is off topic.

Do you want to argue about the balance of DDO, or do you want to argue about whether atheism is a reasonable position? If the former, then you need to delete everything after the first paragraph. If the latter, then you need to change the resolution.

Or, how about deleting the whole debate, cancelling it. Then make your post again over in the forums, where we can have a discussion rather than a debate. In that case, I'll be happy to point out errors in your arguments about atheism, and other people can discuss the issue of DDO's slant.

Regardless, if you offer a citation as support for an argument, the cited source should actually agree with the argument. You'll catch grief if you claim that your sources say things that they don't actually say.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by wiploc 3 years ago
wiploc
Maryland_KidWeilerTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.