Secular Society Amounts to Statism

Thanks, Jordeef, for challenging me to this debate.Pro begins, "If our government ever comes to the place where we renounce our accountability to God, we will cease to have basic human rights." Of course, the United States of America and many other countries are secular nations; they do not reference God or religion but instead hold humanist values as the basis of fundamental rights [1]. Likewise, various cultures would rely on their own set of values, secular or otherwise, to govern their lives in an anarchist society. I reject the notion that God is the only point of reference for which rights are derived. Indeed, there are many other philosophical subscriptions including humanism, objectivism, etc. which give us other moral grounds to protect certain rights, particularly the right to life. Pro suggests that in an anarchist society, we would be held accountable not to God but "the selfish whims of man." We are already accountable to the selfish whims of man. First, the alleged word of God is not used to determine the law outside of theocratic states. Second, there are many interpretations of God; it would be for all intents and purposes impossible to determine which God or which of God's values we ought to apply to the law. Third, it would be offensive and oppressive to impose religious values on the non-religious within any society. Pro has offered us no proof that "an ambitious man" would rise up and take power within an anarchist society, though this contention does not uphold the resolution anyhow. Pro continues, "Having a sense of accountability for our actions gives us a reason to not be selfish; only an idiot would be benevolent if he was powerful and believed God did not exist." Of course, one doesn't have to be religious to have a conscience. Theism is not a prerequisite for morality. My opponent states, "In this society [secular], the government (be it a doctatorship or oligarchy, what-have-you), would become the god, and it would create our rights. We would be completely subjugated." We have no reason to accept this allegation as true. Pro also hasn't given us any evidence or explanation as to how a secular (presumably anarchist) society would automatically become a State. In a state of anarchy, people don't worship the authorative State as they do God. They also do not derive "rights" from the government. Instead, government services are used to protect the fundamental right that is the backbone of an anarchist society: the non-aggression principle [2]. Thus far, we have no reason to believe that a secular society amounts to Statism. Secular refers to things that are not religious. Why would a lack of religious values amount to Statism, i.e., a tyrannical, aggressive monopoly on force and violence? The audience should keep in mind that the two are not related. After all, we already have Statism despite secularism. Further, just because people/society are not religious does not mean they will necessarily respect or legitimize the authority of the State. I am not religious and I am not a Statist. Pro hasn't met his burden. My argument is essentially that the two concepts are not related. A secular society would respect the rights of man according to man, not according to man's interpretation of God. [1] http://secularnation.org...[2] http://www.lewrockwell.com...