The Instigator
Con (against)
6 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
7 Points

religion in government, america is a christian nation

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/2/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 720 times Debate No: 20186
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)




It is said that america is a christian nation, established on christian principles. This is then used for justification for abortion and gay marriage prohibition along with school prayer, and open endorsements of religion in government, and religious icons on Public grounds. This is unconstitutional due to the establshment clause in the first ammendment. "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof."


I accept and look forward to your opening argument in Round 2! I will assume the BoP is on you.
Debate Round No. 1


thanks for accepting, burden of proof is equal on both sides, as we are both making claims abut society.

I shall make my argument in a number of parts

1) it is unconstitutional for government to endorse religion explicitly or implicitly.
evidence A) establishment clause of the bill of rights
evidence B) various supreme court cases' interpretation of the establishment clause

2) our constitution (not the declaration) contains no explicit or implicit references to God, Jesus, Allah or any other entity
evidence A) The constitution



Nur-Ab-Sal forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


I will respectfully await my opponent's argument


I thank my opponent and apologise for skipping last round, I had schoolwork to do.

My opponent makes two points; I will address them and make points of my own in this last round left.

Rebuttal 1: Unconstitutional

It may be unconstitutional for the Government to endorse (or restrict) a religion, but this does not prevent the individuals in the Government from using their religion as a basis for their decision making. In fact, if one is true to their religion, it should almost be impossible for one to make a decision that requires moral consideration without looking to religion. I am, of course, refrencing the "religion in government" aspect of the title.

If the title was more like "religion is government," referencing a theocracy or a similar government, then the Establishment cause could take effect. If the Government endorsed a particular religion or threw Christianity upon non-Christians, then you would be correct. But we cannot assume there is no "religion in government," because there are several politicians and lawmakers who look to their faith for moral guidance in decision-making.

Rebuttal 2: References to God

I assume this half of the argument refers to the "America is a Christian nation" aspect of the title. My opponent is correct in stating that the Constitution has no direct references to God, Allah, or other deities (the famous Article 1, Section 7 exclusion of Sundays may be a Christian reference).

However, there are several examples of official American documents that do reference Christian mythology.


The Declaration of Independence - my opponent actually alluded to this, with his admittance of "not the declaration" in his argument 2 above. The Declaration of Independence is the document that literally founded America. It may not set up the Government, but we are not arguing whether the Constitution is Christian, we are arguing about America. The Declaration of Indepdence, then, is important to consider.

The Declaration includes phrases such as "all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights," and "the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them."

Federalist Papers - Some of the Founding Fathers even admitted that America was a Christian nation, or at least, was founded upon Christianity. For example, in Federalist No. 2, first Chief Justice of the Supreme Court John Jay wrote, in reference to America, "a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion."

Currency - "In God We Trust."

As you can see, although religious freedom is completely certain, the Founding Fathers not only dated their documents with "In the Year of Our Lord," but filled them with references to Christianity, direct or indirect.

America is founded on Christianity, though it establishes freedom of religion.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
I am SO sorry for forfeiting. I have so much to do. I will return for Round 3.
Posted by happyatheist 4 years ago
i am trying to argue the separation of church and state
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
what exactly are you trying to argue here?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:33 
Reasons for voting decision: It was close, hence the source points, but con gets conduct for the FF. Pro gets arguments by linking direct references to the declaration and showing how they relate to a god, pro won arguments.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 4 years ago
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:34 
Reasons for voting decision: Con was quite vague and his intent on writing about the separation of church and state was overshadowed by his sub-points, which Pro refuted. Both sides weren't exactly convincing, but Pro's more in depth argument did topple Con's case (references to Christian mythology and distinction between endorsement of religion and actual influence of religion on individuals)....Con gains points for sources and conduct for Pro's forfeit while Pro earns some points for arguments.