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

Electing an Atheistic President

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 Challenge
This debate challenge was issued to themightyindividual. If you are themightyindividual, login to see your options.
Challenge Expires In
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/14/2020 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 days ago Status: Challenge Period
Viewed: 18 times Debate No: 124038
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




Sources will be found at the end with their corresponding number

The argument presented by you is hardly rhetorically sound. Beginning at the end, Gallup polls from 2019 suggest that a small majority (60%) {Gallup News 1} of American's are favorable to an atheist presidential candidate. Now admittedly this in context is a not a wholly good thing when one recognizes that most religions garner upwards of 80% support from the general public none the less your remark that no one would vote or if taken less literally an atheist couldn't find a realistic body of support is invalidated.
Moving on to the more intriguing topic of discussion, Morality. I won't bother arguing directly against your point as it would likely devolve into an absurdist argument rather I will attempt to challenge your point with ethos and pathos rather than logos (logic). Since your "Character Witness" is a fairly respected collection of individuals [God, Jesus Christ, Etc. ] I will naturally find it difficult to build a credibly strong ethos of my own. Before we continue I must make a few critical point. I will be arguing that some Christians act or have acted immorally in the name I God as described in the Abrahamic faiths, However I will not be arguing that all atheists are moral and as such I will not entertain descriptions of various immoral atheists. For the context of this debate I would determine victory as your agreement that an atheist. . . Not a majority, Nor even a large minority but at least one atheist is moral. This would naturally indicate that morality is not solely the property of those who worship and would open the door to further discussion which is all I want. Again I am at this point not arguing for an atheistic president I am simply challenging your denial of morality to atheists as a "Gatekeeper" preventing the discussion from advancing. With that out of the way I would like to begin.

"A man's ethical behaviour should be based effectually on sympathy, Education, And social ties and needs; no religious basis is necessary. Man would indeed be in a poor way if he had to be restrained by fear of punishment and hope of reward after death. " {2}

-Albert Einstein

Now Albert Einstein himself was at the very least a spiritual man but was an objective thinker and here he makes and entirely interesting point which I will investigate in a moment. Now MORALITY is defined in many ways I will be using this one "a particular system of values and principles of conduct, Especially one held by a specified person or society. " Now naturally this is a fairly favorable definition for your stance. Christianity has a well established system of values and is widely accepted by society, But my good friend this does not by definition prohibit the creation of alternative moral frameworks. Specifically an atheist could take all of the moral teachings of your lord and savior Christ and simply neglect the aspect of worship. They would live humbly, Treat their fellow man with kindness or even cruelty as the book demands simply without the aspect addition of worship. By definition they would have the same moral framework as you. But this has devolved into a bit of a logical argument which is a mental burden I dare not place on you instead I posit this. There is an old story a great one which I hold close to my heart in your Bible. It is the tale of a Good Samaritan, Far to often is the true meaning of that story neglected. Your own teachings suggest that often it is the ones we would least expect, Who have the least reason to help us that will. That we as people my judge a whole group of people wrongly and that all it takes is one, One good person to change the perception of a whole. There is another piece of your belief I would like to look at. The Idea that I AM THIRD. God is first, My fellow man second, And myself third. Is it not possible that in the absence of God a good moral man might not say I am third. My people are first, Then my world with its beauties and bounties, And I myself remain third. Is that not moral to care for your fellow man with all your heart. Is that not itself the same humility offered by worship. Does that not at least open the door to the possibility however slim that one if only one atheist could be moral could perhaps even be a good parent, A good leader, Maybe even a good president?

I look forward to your response.

1: https://news. Gallup. Com/poll/254120/less-half-vote-socialist-president. Aspx
2: Albert Einstein (2010). "Ideas And Opinions", P. 39, Broadway Books
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
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
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 4 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.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.