We should eliminate atheism from society like Islamic countries.

. .. "Christians were always the ones oppressing atheists. " This is Con being a drama queen. No one is oppressing Con" - Oh really? Then why are atheists being bullied? And why in several states, are atheists banned from running for office? . http://m.dailykos.com... . http://americanhumanist.org... "Muslims are not jamming their religion down atheists' throat. " They are in Europe. Sharia patrols have become a nuissance. Sharia patrols being groups of Muslims acting as morality police, forbidding shorts, alcohol, pork, tattoos, etc in "Sharia zones". - Your source points to ONE gang. This is hardly representative of all Muslims. And how would banning atheism fix this? "Matthew 10:34: Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. " And of course this is being used as a deceptive false dichotomy because the sword is the "truth". The "divider" is the truth". - You are wrong. You pointed out a completely unrelated verse to rebut my point. You have to prove how your verse is related to my verse. Regardless, why did Jesus say, "Do not suppose I have come to bring peace? " That doesn't sound like a religion of peace. "Either way, God killed babies. Enough said. "Another false dichotomy. Con has used Judaism per the OT, knowing full well that Jesus stood against it. " - This doesn't rebut my point. Why did God kill innocent babies? There is no reason to do this. If you want people to worship your God, at least make him a good person. Oh, and Jesus was for the OT. . https://danielmiessler.com... "You can't force people to believe in fairy tales in the bible. " This fairytale? " - Irrelevant. Your debate about this existence of God is irrelevant to this debate. Also, in your other debate against me about the existence of God, you lost. So, yeah. The bible is a bunch of fairy tales. . http://www.debate.org... "You can't just say, "Sweden has few religious people; Sweden let in Muslims, therefore atheists favor Muslims. " Oh? Why not? The culture has been militant to Christianity. "But you can't prove that it is atheists fault Islam is more popular. " Atheists have been militant to Christianity and nonmilitant to Islam - Did you even read your links? One is about hate speech, and the other is about how one man is being deported. Neither of these proves a Muslim bias. Plus, both are isolated incidents, not large-scale favoritism. Oh, and as for your link about hate speech, Muslims would be attacked by this law as well, as they are against homosexuality. "To close out this round, I will repeat this argument again. Pro wants to unconstitutionally ban all opposing religions. " Nope. Just Atheism and Islam per their militantism and threat to the national security of America and the West. We would love to coexist with Atheism and Islam, but neither wants to coexist with us, thus we have the right to defend ourselves against them. " - What? Atheism is a threat to national security? How? That is the most ridiculous thing I have read. Do you have any evidence to prove this? Atheists are fine with coexisting, it's just no one wants to coexist with them. Your only point against atheism is that they don't believe in your God. That is hardly a national security threat. So yes, it is unconstitutional to ban atheism. "Really? Based on this assessment, Con is saying: reason = atheism and nonsense = religion If it beats religion any day of the week, why are 90 % of people on Earth of some religion? Con seeds this point" - First off, I don't "seed" anything. Next, around 16% of people are non-religious, so get your data right. Finally, public opinion doesn't change logic or reason. You didn't prove anything with this point. You say that many people are religious. Great. What does that prove? Many people believed that the Earth was flat. Does that make it true? However, a groups popular opinion which might make a difference are scientists, the people who study evolution, the Big Bang, and other things. Only 33% believe in a God, and 42% are atheists. So when you look at people who would know if the things in the bivle are possible, few actually believe religion is true and possible. . http://www.pewforum.org... "Pro's idea is in direct violation of this amendment. " Not if the ideology is a threat to the national security of the United States. Jimmy Carter ordered the hault of Muslims in the 1970's for this reason. " - I like how you are going off topic. This debate is about atheism. This has nothing to do with banning atheism. How is a ban of Muslim immigrants in the past any evidence for the banning of atheism in the present? "It also is in violation of common sense. " Nope. Being militant to a group who you coexist with fine and welcoming a group congenitally hostile to you, who deals the death penalty to homosexuals, deems women as 1/2 in court, where women cannot go out uncovered, get a job without written male permission, or drive a car, lacks common sense" - Yes, you should allow Muslims those beliefs. If they don't act on it, then what is the problem. For example, we think the KKK has some awful beliefs. Does that mean we ban their beliefs and restrict their speech? NO. If they don't act on their beliefs, then why can't they speak their mind? We have a freedom of speech, let us use it. Again, this also has nothing to do with banning atheism. I think you realized that you will lose that point, so you are concentrating only on Islam. "Why do I have to believe in your god? " You don't. But if you become militant or allow unvetted Islamic jihadists into our country because of a militant need to oppose Christians above protecting the country, we will have to detain you for an undisclosed amount of time. " - Yay, I win the debate. Voters, Pro just said I don't have to believe in God, therefore proving he doesn't think atheism should be banned. Obviously I don't want jihadists in the country. But Muslims should be allowed in. Otherwise, you are blaming them for the actions of the others. And you want to jail a 13 year old kid for not wanting to ban Muslim immigration? We don't live in the USSR, you can't lock me up for my opinion. "Prove that terrorists attacks will stop if we ban atheism. " Simple. It certainly hasn't been Christians opening the door to Islamists. Once we get atheists out of our way we can round up Muslims and ship them back to Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, etc. It'll be unexpected. The military will surround mosques and round them up. " - That is very scary. You want to give the government power to deport all members of a group. Even worse, you are doing it because of the actions of a few. By this logic, the U. S. should deport all Christians, because of the Crusades and the Planned Parenthood attack. The U. S. should deport all Japanese because of Pearl Harbor. You see how ridiculous that would be? When you start punishing everyone for the actions of a few, you no longer are moral. Why should we deport all Muslims and send them back to a war torn, 3rd world area? That is insane. Some of my friends are Muslim. They are kids. Should they be sent back to the Middle East to die? Finally, you have no proof atheists are letting in Muslims. By your logic, it is the Christians. "They are the dominant group, so they are to blame. " As for your point about Islam and Nazism, Nazi Germany was Christian, and how can you say all Muslims are like Nazis because of one Muslim in the past. To conclude, I have rebutted Pro's argument that it is atheists fault that Islam is more popular, and I showed his true, unconstitutional plan, that he wants to ban all opposing beliefs to strengthen his own.