Free will

First of all thank you for taking up the challenge. Second of all you did not accept the rules. Clearly defined and if you had a problem which I also stated comment it before accepting the debate. Rule that you broke: I also would like my opponent to refrain from straw manning my position since I haven't give one apart from against free will instead this will be solely about free will. Not atheism, Determinism or whatever ism it might be. If you had a problem: Ask questions in the comment section if you are unsure about something. I will still continue and when the debate is over will re-upload it in hopes someone does accept the rules or comments a problem. I am going to argue that under your worldview, Atheism, We do not have free will. This is a strawman. Sure you can assume this given debates and what I state but I did say refrain from straw manning. Hopefully this does not continue instead you stick to the topic free will not even mentioning atheism. There are only two ways that this universe could have been created; the supernatural, Meaning God, Or the natural, Meaning physics, Chemistry, Etc. Off topic again. I wanted it to specifically talk about free will yet you bring the universes creation. You could have asked are we going to assume certain things and followed by your questions in Round 2 I would have answered them. Bear in mind this could have been asked in the comment section. Since your worldview does not include God as part of the equation, All we are left with is the natural. When does your argument start and your story stop? Your worldview is what I said refrain from. Address free will specifically instead of what I could be. Therefore, Your worldview necessitates the working of the natural, Thus, I"m only working within that. No you can include God as part of the equation if you want if you to picked the beneficial part which was option 2. The worldview of the natural consists of the physics, Laws of chemistry, Etc. Our brain works on the physics, Laws of chemistry, Etc. If that"s all our brain is, Then we don"t have free will. What is this? I said defend free will not tell me how I am wrong. This can't be your opening argument because all you are doing is rebutting arguments that I haven't even made. When one chemical state in our brain leads to another chemical state in our brain, Then our reactions are just those chemical reactions. They are not our decisions, They are just chemical reactions. No where here have you defended your side which is pro free will or pro free will is beneficial. Still do not know what it is you are choosing. Option 1 or Option 2. Since I do not want the next Round being another acceptance/clarification Round. I pick the option because Pro did not pick one. Option 1 would be what I am picking. Free will does not existArgument 1:By definition we cannot have free will because we operate with constraints. This can be seen with being born. We did not choose to be born instead due to a choice made by our parents we were born. Even if you just say picking to eat an apple or an orange is a choice we made with free will. I would say that is based on past experiences to which one you prefer, DNA that was given to by your parents when life started which all had a play in part of choosing between the apple or the orange. With this in mind I have shown we were not born because of free will and even the most smallest choices are influenced by many factors that are restraints that limit to how free a persons will can be. I will stick with one argument and bring more in if need be.