The United States is not a Christian nation.

First, I will defend my case.... 1) I confused the Declaration of Independence with the Pledge; that is my fault (how I did, I don't know). However, my argument still retains, as the concept is not refuted....if we are "under God," we are then under his laws. He does point out my error in mixing the DOI with the Pledge, however he does not refute the idea of the fact that "under God" obviously means we are under his codes. 2) Deists still believe that moral codes stem from God. Yes, God obviously doesn't play a part in the world per Deist beliefs, but morals still stem from God as he created EVERYTHING. 3) Christianity is the only religion that can explain objective morality for several reasons: a) Islam is similar to Christianity; however, lawmaking per their doctrine is completely arbitrary. The Christian God is the embodiment of Goodness; thus, his laws are naturally good because they stem from the embodiment of the Good. The God of Islam is not like so; he merely arbitrarily decides what is good and what is not; he is thus a fiediest and defines arbitrary morality into existence. Islam is about blind devotion; Christianity is about finding a personal relationship with God and his objective rules he applies to us. b) Judaism lacks one thing that makes Christian morality more complete: the Cross. Since the Jews negate the existence of Christ, they fail to account for many of the transcendental rules that Christ stated during his time on Earth; namely, the Sermon on the Mount. c) Also extend my weighing mechanism of transcendental morality on his argument where he claims that I confuse "morality" with "religion." My weighing mechanism specifically states that morality that the US upholds and Christianity are naturally intertwined; he is merely stating this is false. Seeing as I have disproven other theistic theories with regard to their capability to uphold transcendental morality, this argument is still legitimate. 4) You can extend my weighing mechanism of transcendental morality on his number 3 argument against my case. When he says that murder, stealing, etc are regarded as "universally bad" he is making a VALUE JUDGMENT. Values are transcendental concepts that are not material; they must come from a transcendental source. When my opponent makes claims like "X is universally bad" or "X claim is based upon ignorance," he is making value judgments that he feels should apply to all people. However, operating under an atheistic framework (a necessary supposition for his side in this debate) he has no reason to have objective morality because objective morality cannot stem from just random accidents of nature. He states that concepts of murder are "universally bad," but what I am saying is that the reason that they are as such is because God has implanted within humans a concept of transcendental morality. Since he cannot account for any source of objective morality, this is a clear reason to vote for my arguments in this debate. Any of my arguments he calls "ludicrous" or "ignorant" can be entirely ignored as those are objective judgments of value that of which he cannot give any meaningful justification for. In fact, when he makes value judgments about my case, he is operating under my framework; he has to use my own purview to prove it wrong. This turns his entire position on him. Look to my Bahnsen analysis, which can be extended, for further clarification. Moreover, my Lewis analysis can be extended....when he says things like "his arguments are ludicrous," and "we can decisively say X argument is true," he is appealing to a universal standard of argumentation and logic that I am supposed to know about. He is not arguing that my standard is bad; rather, he is arguing that I am not upholding some universal standard that I and everyone else are supposed to know about. Objective standards, however, must come from an objective source: God. 5) One last point here, to clarify my second argument. My argument here is that even if it is proved that the US factually was not designed to be a Christian nation, my argument is that it is operating under Christian principles whether it wants to or not due to its claims of objective morality and justice. Onto his new point.... 1) I already clarified my mistake with the DOI; but, again, the essence of that argument is still retained. 2) I would argue here that the Treaty of Tripoli is talking about conceptions of seperating Church and State; i.e. the US was not meant to be a theocratic Christian nation. The Treaty has little issue with religion other than that religion and the state should not be married, lest we suffer issues that the Europeans did so many years ago. We are debating about principles...i.e, principles of justice, law, government, etc. We are not debating if the US was meant to be a theocracy led by the Church, which is clearly what the Treaty is discussing. 3) You can extend my second argument again...even if the US claimed it wasn't operating under Christian principles, when it upholds things like objective standards, objective morality, and objective law, it is using inherently Christian concepts; not Islamic concepts; not Judaism concepts (although make this note: Christianity and Judaism have a great deal in common, seeing as they use the same Old Testament...however, Jews ignore Christ's sacrifice on the Cross so they lose out on many of the transcendental rules of Christianity); nor atheistic concepts. So, thus far, you're voting Pro for several reasons.. A) The PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE (my bad...) states that we are a nation "Under God." This means we are under His Divine principles. B) The Treaty example he posed was talking more about church and state than the ethical principles on which the US is founded, which is what we are debating.... C) My second argument, the primary argument, is extended. Seeing as Christianity is the only source of transcendental morality, you are clearly voting pro in this debate. All of my opponent's value judgments must stem from a transcendental source; that source is clearly the Christian God.