Certainly. I'll bet we all agree spring grass is usually green and a clear sky usually blue, objects fall to the earth at approximately 32 feet per second per second, and Audrey Tautou is beautiful. Just for starters.
Is there a question to which you all would give the same - or almost the same - answer?
I certainly can't speak authoritatively for the opinion of anyone other than myself, but it seems to me that everyone can easily be convinced to agree that if something is, then it is; and also that nothing can both be and not be at the same time and in the same way. In other words, the Laws of Logic are valid.
An interesting point to note, however, is that holding to the Laws of Logic can only be rationally justified under Christian assumptions.
Polytheism insists that things that are may not be, making the Laws of Logic invalid under polytheism.
Deism places God under the authority of time, making time a non-rational authority over reality, thereby denying any ultimate rational justification.
Unitarianism rejects the idea that God is His own reason for His actions, thereby rejecting a rational God altogether, falling into the same irrational trap atheism demands.
Any Monotheistic worldview without a divine atoning sacrifice insists that debts can actually be paid by one who has nothing to pay debts with, again making the Laws of Logic invalid.
Christianity alone stands coherent, allowing for the possibility of knowledge via the validity of the Laws of Logic.
If, as you claim, morality is obeying god, how do you know that obeying god is good? Isn't that totally circular?
Are all presuppositions equally valid? If not, how does one determine which are more valid than others?
Isn't it the case that, rather than presupposing god as it claims to, the presuppositional view actually presupposes logic and reason?
What's an easy way to demonstrate that unitarianism is false?
Can you know anything independently of what god has revealed to you?