In an Atheistic World, the American Concept of Inalienable Rights is Based on Sound Reasoning

Thanks to my opponent for presenting this debate. I would like to start off by presenting some definitions of my own. Aethism is the rejection of the belief of deties instead of an absent one. Next, when he says "inalienable" it means Unable to be taken away from or given away by the possessor. And since this is in America, the possesor will have to be the American government. C 1. Equality Aetheist believe that there is no god, and therefore turn to look towards scientific means to justify their existence on this earth. Science then reninforces that we all are one human being capable of living one life, just as everyone else. Since there is no set social status, made by religion, we all are made equal, and die equal. Because of this they have certain standard of human rights which can not be taken away. As livescience.com explains, the more religious you are the more you may ground your generosity less in emotion, and more in other factors such as doctrine, a communal identity, or reputational concerns. While being aetheist gives you the strength of their emotional connection to another person is critical to whether they will help that person or not. Because of the more compassion, they therefore believe more in the power of eachindivual, deeming inalienable rights. C2. One Life Under the concepts of aetheism, aethists accept the fact that there is one life, the life that we live on earth. They believe that there is no existence after death, or reincarnations of sorts. This means, that because this is our one life, it is the sort of heaven that religious people strive for. We have been bred so far, just like how religious people try to good in order to achieve heaven. We are born into this world/heaven, and because it is temporary, it provides the basis for the fact that each moment in every indivual live's is invaluable, because once finished, it will be done forever. Not only that, it means that the quality of life is important too, becuase if we live an inhumane world with no undeniable rights, then we can maintain a rigidity of rights to allow everyone basic necesseties. Because of this, it once again allows for the sound reasoning for inalienable righs. C3. Smarter Science Daily says that religion is a byproduct of humans' tendency to perceive agency and intention as causes of events, to see "the hands of God" at work behind otherwise natural phenomena. "Humans are evolutionarily designed to be paranoid, and they believe in God because they are paranoid," says Kanazawa. This innate bias toward paranoia served humans well when self-preservation and protection of their families and clans depended on extreme vigilance to all potential dangers. "So, more intelligent children are more likely to grow up to go against their natural evolutionary tendency to believe in God, and they become atheists." and so , more intelligent people are statistically significantly more likely to exhibit social values and religious and political preferences that are novel to the human species in evolutionary history C4. Empiricism As described by pscyocology today. More than 1,500 distinct cultures throughout the world documented in The Encyclopedia of World Cultures, only 19 contain any reference to atheism. Not only do these 19 cultures exist far outside of our ancestral home in the African savanna, but all 19 of them without an exception are former Communist societies. Because they are communists, that means that they all have the reasoning to believing in the inalienable right to the sharing of money, wealth, and social stature, (all htough that may be a bad inalianable right) As for the cross-examination, I think its kind of hard to do cross-examination when you have really presented your case. I look forward to this debate because I really like this issue. Thanks for debating. http://www.psychologytoday.com... http://www.livescience.com... http://www.sciencedaily.com...