A True Christian has and holds onto morals far more than an atheist has or does.

Alright, I will be reintroducing each and every one of my point and then countering what my opponent said about each of them. 1. Christians can interrupt the bible in various ways, thus they have the ability to hold onto morals just as little as atheists. I supported this with the idea that many Christians do not find homosexuality wrong. My opponent countered by stating Leviticus does not allow for homosexuality. Leviticus. The book that bans rabbits, pigs, and shellfish from being eaten. The book that states a woman is unclean for 33 days after giving birth to a boy and 66 after that of a girl. The book which demands animal sacrifice. The book that bans wearing "a garment made from two kinds of material mixed together". The book which dictates "you shall not round off the side-growth of your heads, nor harm the edges of your beard." The book which dictates that a woman is unclean during her period and should be cut off from the outside world! This book not only is generally not accepted by Christians but the vast majority don't even know of its teachings. I beg my opponent to seriously tell me, in honesty, that he has never eaten rabbits, pigs, or any type of shellfish. That he has never warn a garment made of two types of materials. That he has never cut his beard. IF we are to use the book Leviticus as the christian moral code THEN my opponent has already lost this case, as barely any christians follow it. In conclusion of my point, my opponent has done little to nothing to attack the point that many christians do indeed interrupt the bible in many different ways. Christians will choose and pick the morals in the bible that are important to themselves while dropping the others. 2. Christians actually hold onto morals less. My proof being that christian children at times abandon their faith to for a more morally suitable code to themselves. My opponent ignores this instead presenting me with the idea of, "Secondly I would like my opponent to explain to me how a child who grows up in a Christian home, whose parents try and bring their child up with the biblical moral code (ten commandments) a code that exists in our society as the laws of the land could possible be "less" moral than a child brought up in a Homosexual/Atheist home where morals are your own ideas and your own judgments." First things first, homosexual lifestyle and christianity is not mutually exclusive. In fact I have met homosexuals who are also christians. Secondly my opponent implies that all atheists are also homosexuals, obviously not true. Third I contest that a child brought up with encouraged free thought will have better morals than that brought up with mandated thought. This being because the childs morals will actually be thought out by the child him/herself instead of dictated at the child, this stops the break down later in life when the child realizes the only reason he/she ever followed said morals was because thats what he/she was told to do. Furthermore my opponent states that the christian morals are already covered by the law, in which case christianity is useless as said morals are already taught under our judicial system. =) 3. Christians actually hold onto morals less (2). This being because an atheists moral code is actually chosen 100% to fit him or herself. My opponent responds by stating that christians have good morals. I have two answers, first off christianity may have some good morals but it also has morals that people tend to disagree with. For instance the woman being unclean moral is mildly disagreed with in contemporary society. As is man being greater than woman in genesis. Secondly the fact that christians have good morals does not stop atheists from having the same morals or better morals. In fact I contest as I did in my last speech that christianity doesn't teach the reasons behind given morals as much as atheism does. For an example let me show the difference between my opponents morals and mine. My opponent: a. Do not murder. b. Do not steal. c. Do not commit adultery. d. Honor your mother and father. e. Do not lie. Myself: a. Do not murder unless in pure self defense. This draws a line between needless murders while effectively following the golden rule. b. Do not steal unless dire need dictates, do no harm in the process. Give back which you have stolen. c. Do not commit adultery, this would not only result in ruining a current relationship but leave no question in my mind that I was in a very shallow relationship. I think a better moral would be to only pursue people who I was already friends with, thereby preventing me from ever committing adultery. d. Honor your mother and father if they in turn honor you. To honor someone who simply despises you is of little point. e. Be truthful with yourself. A lie to others does not have to be a bad thing. It is how or for what purpose a lie is used. Not only do these morals make more sense in common everyday application as they are not extremes but they also show a comprehension for why the moral stands. A man who holds the greatest morals but does not know why has no morals at all. My opponent goes on to state that christians who have read the bible know why they hold their morals. To some extent I agree but this is only applicable to those who have read it. The others do not, the majority. 4. Atheists are better at holding onto morals. This because an atheist defines his own morals. To go against ones own morals is to go against oneself. My opponent makes no comment. 5. Atheistic morals are better than Christian morals. Two reasons: a. Atheists actually know why they follow the morals they do. Some christians simply follow because of blind faith. I have already covered this in (3.). b. Atheists have more room to make their morals, this allows for growth. The christian morals are supposed to stay the same throughout life. My opponent answers with, "Again your very naive when it comes to Christianity I am afraid. It's about a spiritual growth with God, not a personal growth. It's about walking with Christ instead of the world." So while this is true it is not my point at all. My point was that people do inevitably grow through human nature. People learn, people experience. Christianity doesn't allow those persons to adapt their morals or make them better. It keeps the same morals forever. My opponent goes on to state, "So from this ideology cheat,lie,kill,steal as long as you yourself feel they are correct?" Which I must respond to by stating, "no." I personally feel the golden rule is a good one to live by. Some atheists feel it is okay to cheat, steal, and kill at the same time many christians feel it is okay to cheat, steal, and kill. I can't talk for those small subsets, I am speaking for atheists in general. Atheism promotes the ideas of logical and free thought with personal improvement in my opinion. Finally my opponent talks about Columbine. Ignoring the lack of proof for Eric Harris being atheist let us compare the 13 people they killed with the people christians have killed. We have the crusades, we have the inquisition, we have christian men joining the KKK to eradicate the blacks. We even have the same thing happening to gays today. Hmmmm... My opponents turn.