You cannot soundly derive morality from 'god'.

(This is my first debate on this site as well) Richard Chappell once wrote "morality is utterly dependent upon religion, and cannot be justified in any other way. " Because I agree with Mr. Chappell, I must oppose today's topic. My opponent begins with an ultimatum: Either god decides what is right and wrong, or he has no say in it. I however provide the following: because of the very nature of how individual morality is determined the influence of a supreme deity is essential. For the clarification of today's debate, the Con offers the following definitions: Soundly Derive- to receive or obtain from a source or origin while following in a systematic pattern without any apparent defect in logic. Morality- a doctrine or system of morals God- A being conceived as the perfect, omnipotent, omniscient originator and ruler of the universe, the principal object of faith and worship in monotheistic religions. For the purposes of this debate, the Christian God. Though we can see that individually, each persons moral code is different, they all have a nondistinct universal following or trend. For example, my opponent and I might disagree on principals such as gay marriage or global warming, but we would both agree that someone shooting us in the head would be an inherently immoral action. We can see that God is inherent in the concept of morality for two basic reasons: 1. An individuals morality is derived from god. 2. God places a check on morality. Allow me to explain: 1. An individuals morality is derived from god. There are three criteria for determining an individuals morality: 1. Societies Impacts, or what society believes is morally acceptable 2. Individual conscience or philosophy derived from past experience 3. Religious upbringing An individuals morality is derived from god because god provides a fundamental foundation for each of these criteria. God provides for societies impacts because of the worlds religious segregation. From the polytheism of the ancient Greeks to the middle east to the Mormons currently thriving in Utah, societies are formed by common religious backgrounds. God provides for morality in an individuals conscience by the very nature of man through the bible, which states the God formed man in his (gods) image. This is also how god provides for an individuals religious upbringing through the formation of His church and through the nourishment found within the holy word. 2. God places a check on morality Steve Cardno once provide an example of how a speed trap forces motorists to slow down to avoid receiving a citation. Just as with the motorists who slow down when faced with a speeding fine, society tends to become more responsible when, as individuals, we're accountable to someone. God provides for this accountability through the promises of a final judgment day when an individual will only be judged of their own actions and merits, not that of his fellow man. The Christian Gospel message of Salvation is meaningless without the concept of right and wrong. God the Creator imposed the (eternal, as well as physical) death penalty for infringement of His Law. In the ultimate act of love the universe has ever known, the Creator then became a man in order to take that penalty for mankind's sin. God upheld the validity of His Law by not relaxing its demands even when God the Son would be the one having to suffer its penalty. Those who believe this can thus know total forgiveness and acceptance by God on that basis. Now on the arguments provided within my opponents case. On his first point, my opponent argues that "If god picks what is right, then what is right is 100% arbitrary" because god could decide that an immoral action is moral. My first argument to this will be that my opponent doesn't provide a warrant for why arbitrary morally is wrong. I would further like to turn this argument and further argue that because of the points under the con case, having arbitrary morals would cause a utopia society because everyone would agree with exactly what is moral. The impacts of this argument include a total loss of all crime and immoral behavior providing for the perfect society. My second argument to my opponents first point will be that god does not change his moral code. Since the death of Jesus Christ the moral code provided by the Bible has not changed. (It could be said that interpretations have changed but interpretations are performed by man an are thus non-topical in today's debate. ) My opponent also says under his first point "he could say to wreck cars on Tuesdays and we would consider that as morally sound. " This will be the foundation for my third argument under my opponent's first point. My opponent once again provides no warrant as to why god would change his moral code, but by this very argument he shows how he is in agreement with the con case. If god has currently determined it is immoral to wreck cars, then it is immoral. However, If god deemed it morally acceptable to wreck cars, then society would except it, and thus my opponent would deem that is was not a problem. Now on to my opponents second point, which argues that "If he doesn't get a say, then why use him as a useless intermediate? " You can look to the arguments I have already provided to see as to why God does receive a say, through the formation of individual moral codes as well as through providing a check for society's morals. In addition to these arguments, one can look to the argument that without god's moral code as argued in the con case proper, society would have no moral code, thus leading to an overabundance in crime, terrorism, death and eventually leading into anarchy and a descent into a state of nature. So in the end of the debate, one should always prefer the con's position because the con allows for a moral code through a supreme being, which allows society to have a moral code, whereas the pro's position doesn't allow or provide for a moral code or any sense of morality through the lacking of a moral standard. I thank you for your time and earnestly await my opponents rebuttal.