• Information on this archive. See IIDB.org
  • Please join us on IIDB (iidb.org)
    This is the archived FRDB and IIDB forum from prior to about March 2014. It is read only. If you would like to respond or otherwise revive a post or topic, please join us on the active forum: IIDB.

The definiton of atheism

Do you want to declare a debate challenge? Do you want someone to come pick up your gauntlet? The express purpose of this forum is for you to do just that! In addition, you would also hammer out the debate parameters with your opponent here.
Posts: 13
Joined: Sun Mar 23, 2014 1:52 pm
Basic Beliefs:
Out Campaign: Real Name:

The definiton of atheism

Post by CyberCynic » Thu Mar 27, 2014 1:11 pm

In order for the moderators to approve a formal debate, the debate proposal must address the following ten parameters:
  1. The topic of the debate.
  2. The opponents of the debate, and what positions they will argue.
  3. The scope of the debate.
  4. The length of the debate, in number of rounds.
  5. Whether statements will be made concurrently or in turns, and if the latter, who goes first.
  6. The maximum length of each statement.
  7. The time limit between statements.
  8. The extent to which quotes and references from outside sources will be allowed.
  9. The starting date of the debate.
  10. Any additional rules or a debate format that debate participants must observe.
  1. The topic is the definition of atheism.
  2. I will champion the argument that entails the theory that atheism is a principle for political organization. Opponents will argue that atheism is something along the lines of a general description for non-conformity with theism - there is plenty of disagreement on the opposition side of the argument, and they are all welcome to the debate.
  3. The scope limits will be better determined during the rules negotiations prior to the debate. The topic is concerned with ontology where determining limits is almost impossible
  4. The discussion should be no longer than 30 rounds of responses.
  5. Statements are to be made in turns, and of course, I will commence the debate with an opening statement.
  6. Arguments are to be cogent and concise, so as to maintain appreciation of concise responses. Long and drawn out statements will only cause disruption of the debate process. There should be plenty of opportunity to present arguments during the debate, so lets try to keep the number of examples of "proofs" to something reasonable to respond to, because eventually, the instigator has to make responses to each of the branches of the arguments they have initiated.
  7. Responses should be within four days, unless the responder claims an extension for personal, or research, reasons; as which they will be required to provide a "deadline." No more than two extensions per response, and excessive use of extensions will be considered harassment and concession of the debate topic.
  8. It is recommended that sources of information be up to date, or otherwise contemporary observations with reason, because outdated information can only be justly used in comparison to the progress that society has achieved.
  9. The start of the debate shall be determined by the moderators, at which time, I will be allowed four days to submit an opening statement.
  10. Rules will be negotiated in full prior to the commencement of arguments. The moderators will be required to identify themselves prior to the debate, listing their qualifications and strategies for moderating the debate. Opponents of my theory will be required identify themselves and list any rules that they would like to impose. I do not expect anybody to side with me, because sheople atheists cannot comprehend that there was probably a compromise made in the modern organization of atheists to appease the dominant Christian society, but should there be, my team will consist of no more than three members.