Religion is true freedom, not atheism

Introduction:I'm arguing against the resolution that "Religion is (true) freedom and not atheism".First I will define some words.Freedom: the power to determine action without restraint. [1]Religion:He mentions theism a couple of time, but he is talking specifically about religion.A specific fundamental set of beliefs and practices generally agreed upon by a number of persons or sects. [2]Atheism:I'm not going to define atheism here. I'm going to challenge Pro's definition in my arguments.Lastly I want to remind everyone that the BoP is on Pro and he has to prove that Religion gives freedom and Atheism doesn't. I only have to disprove his arguments to win.Rebuttals:I'm going to divide my rebuttals in 4 parts so it's easier to understand. These 4 parts represent the arguments of Pro.Part 1: Religion gives freedom.Here pro quote the bible a couple of times related to fairness.Then Pro mentions that a corrupt government should not be tolerated, but he doesn't quote the bible this time.His main argument is related to governments. He gives an example of Iran and how they rebelled twice. Pro claims that the reason they rebelled was because of religion.This is a non sequitur.The example Pro is giving has too many issues. [3]First, the reasons of the rebellions are most of the time attributed to international pressure.Other reasons are cultural and religious traditions that are UNIQUE to them. This is important because this means that these traditions didn't help because they were religious.Other issue is that this theocracy, that Pro claims that gives freedom to the people, is as unpopular as the dictatorship before the revolutions. [3]My last rebuttal on this part would be that religion an atheism are not exclusive. Religions like some forms of Buddhism are non theistic. Hinduism holds atheism to be valid, and others that are "ok" with atheism.Part 2: Atheism doesn't give freedom.In this part, Pro mentions some tyrannical governments and claims that it was atheism the reason of these, and the reason on there were no rebellions like in his example of Iran.This is another non sequitur.There is no reason to think that atheism is the reason of the dictatorships, the reason people didn't rebel or that they were able to control the people.One common counter example of a non sequitur for this issue is that maybe their evil nature is caused by their evil mustaches. Look at those evil mustaches. Pro then tries to avoid the non sequitur claiming that atheism "is a result of the ussr" and that it was created "with the sole purpose of the controlling the people. Here Pro didn't give any source, but it doesn't matter. He is completely wrong and here is why:The ussr was established in 1992 [4]The first time the word "atheism" was used in 1546 [5]Atheistic ideas are older than the bible. The 5th century BCE philosopher Diagoras is known as "the first atheist". [6]Part 3: Religion brings free thinking.Here Pro claims that religion brings free thinking because:Everyone is able to interpret what the dogma means.Opinions of the people come from God and the Pope.Here Pro clearly contradict himself. He is not able to think freely if the opinions come from clear source. Even if he is interpreting the dogma, it is still a dogma. If is not obeying that dogma, then he is not able to know, in the case of god, his word, and in the case of the pope, his opinions.Part 4: Atheism doesn't let you think freely.Opinions of the people come from biased source (not god) like Christopher Hitchens, Richard Dawkins, Sam Harris and Stephen Hawking.Here Pro is showing an argument similar to the reason religion brings free thinking.What he doesn't understand is that atheism is not related to what those human beings have to say. They are atheist sure, but they have their opinions that may be different to the opinions of other atheists, because there is no dogma.There is no need for interpretation of what others say.Atheism exist as a response of theism. Anti religious may be popular now, but it is not against free thinking either. Avoiding dogma and start thinking freely is part of what this "biased media" stands for.Thank for the debate. Vote Con.Sources:1. http://dictionary.reference.com...2. http://dictionary.reference.com...3. http://endeavors.unc.edu...4. http://www.history.com...5. http://www.merriam-webster.com...6. Plato's theology (1942). Solmsen Friedrich