Resolved: That Atheism is more desirable to general society than Christianity.

Hm. .. Okay. "As started about, there is a difference between moral law and how we enforce it. Luke 16:17 and Matthew 5:17 refer to moral law; no one can re-write morality. " I'm sorry, but did anyone else see Jesus say that only moral law applies? I didn't think so. He said every LETTER of the law is still valid and extended. My opponent is doing selective reading, he's ONLY interpreting what HE want's it to be. "The Revelations reference refers to what Christ will do to the sexual immoral in His final judgement. This doesn't only apply to fornicators, but the murderers, thieves, etc. " Still doesn't make it right or moral. "Matthew 10:34 is in the contexts of the spiritual sword, the sword against immorality for the salvation of souls. " I did not mistake the context of this passage. I went back and read around this verse to see if I could see where you get the idea of a spiritual sword, but the fact of the matter is, there wasn't. My opponent is, yet again, interpreting a passage to selectively put in a message that he wants and trying to pass it off as universal fact. "3. Justice" Oh boy. "The problem with people thinking this is extreme is because we have a tainted view of sin. We think one little lie isn't all that bad, but what if you're a perfect being? Sin is SO horrendous to God, that we deserve eternal punishment for what we have done. " Eternal punishment for a lie? This is the destructive mindset of the Christian. They think that it's actually OKAY to eternally punish someone for something as little as a lie because they refuse to worship a dictator. "We can suffer for eternity or it OR we can accept the sacrifice of Jesus Christ who took away our sin. " Jesus was never sacrificed! He consented to his sacrifice. Imagine you are a Jewish Rabbi and you have to sacrifice an animal for YHWH and instead of finding a prized animal to sacrifice, the animal took the initiative and volunteering to be sacrificed. It would lose it's meaning. Now to be sacrificed means to lose a significant amount, Jesus consented, he knew that he wouldn't lose anything, he knew he would resurrect, he knew he would join back up in Heaven with God, he didn't lose anything. The fact is, God created us with sin in our nature. We know this because a child will sin because he doesn't know better. We sin because God gave us in. Then, he punishes us if we disobey him. For what? compulsory love. This is the CORE tenet of Christianity, that if you fail to give compulsory love to a celestial being then you deserve to be punished forever. And you wonder why I don't want this dominating my society. However, if you want to look at sin, sin and the "sacrifice" of Jesus is immoral. The idea that through the punishment and torture of another human being that your actions and moral responsibilities can be relieved is unethical and immoral. To bring it further, that to say that through this immoral sacrifice and torture, one that took place before you were born, in which you were never consulted on, but I have to treat it as if I was there present, putting in the nails into his hands and feet. For what? To relieve the sin that God GAVE US at birth. This is a sinister idea. You have no say in a sacrifice and torture of a human being but you are morally bound to it and you have to COMPULSORILY love the being that gave you sin and that planned the sacrifice of this being or else you DESERVE eternal punishment. "4. Loving God. " You can have free will without sin. We can have our own lives, our own choices but still be immune to committing evil. EVEN SO, even if you allow us to commit evil, you can still have free will without making sin so prevalent in us. Children, before they even know better, commit sin. Which shows that sin is in our nature and God gave us our nature. We were born sick but commanded to be well. "As for homosexuality, yes it is a sin. No, people are not "born that way". No one said that thirty years ago; it's just an excuse. " Just an excuse? Just because we weren't as advanced and knowledgeable in the past does not allow you to use it now. We once thought that disease was caused by immorality. Does not mean now we can say "Well no one said that disease was caused by a virus so therefore we can conclude it's just an excuse. " "There have been hundreds of homosexuals who were able to rid themselves of their inclinations and live happy lives as heterosexual beings. " Wrong, they weren't "cured". They were injected with so much moral guilt that they suppress their feelings because they think it's so wrong and THAT'S immoral. "If homosexuality is so pure, why does it often result in STDs? " Well. .. Heterosexual couples can get STDs, but if you're referring to HIV, then you're still wrong. Heterosexual couples still can get HI. "So what if they test high in intelligence? That doesn't necessarily benefit society. " Yes it does. Hence why we focus on education. Intelligence moves humanity forward, unlocks answers and makes society better and "Atheism provides no moral code. " Atheism does provide a moral code. It's imbedded in our evolutionary history and our instincts. Read up on morality from a non-religious view. "A belief that sets up moral bounds to stop murder, thievery and other dangerous influences on society. " Most of America's prison population is FULL of Christians. This proves that this belief does NOTHING to stop the people from committing crimes. why Atheism is better: My opponent can argue all day at what the perfect Christian is, a "true" Christian. Except an actual true Christian would kill those who sin and beat their slaves properly. But, the fact of the matter is that there has been very few True Christian's, they barely exist so the arguments of my opponent are invalid. Let me ask of you, what is better in society? A philosophy that teaches it's followers to kill and compulsory love a celestial dictator or else you get eternal punishment. Or, a philosophy that teaches it's followers to do good for humanity. I rest my case.