Christianity is a force for good in the world.
Debate Rounds (4)
The debate will go as follows.
2) Opening statement
4) Closing statement
Now to look towards the modern day, the Christian church remains a patriarchal establishment. The injustice to women is institutional. That is half the world"s population who are doomed to be listed with the livestock. On top of the patriarchy there is of course anti-homosexuality, these are people who are being punished by the church, not for what they believe, but for who they love and how they express it. This cannot be good for the world. Love is so desperately lacking in life, love needs dispensing not suppressing. Another unforgivable aspect of the modern day church is the idea that AIDS as a disease is bad, however, not as bad as condoms. Millions dead, for whom? And for what? It certainly wasn't for any force of good. Finally in this opening statement I will briefly touch on the most reprehensible part of Christianity in recent times, the long-standing institutional child rape. I do not think I need to expand on the point of pedophilia and why it is wrong. A force for good? Well, unquestionably not a good that I would fight for.
No one can argue Christianity doesn't have some wonderful morals, however, these morals are not exclusive to Christianity, and the works of charity done by Christians are not exclusive to Christians. The force for good is already within human beings, Christianity, perhaps not intentionally, but undoubtedly persistently, distorts it.
Christianity also pioneered social work. The first American woman to ever be awarded the Nobel Peace Prize was Jane Addams. The church also co-founded the first settlement house in the US, hoping to bridge the gap between poor and rich.
The London society for the prevention of cruelty to children, or the London SCCP, campaigning from the wider church, was the first force to stop cruelty towards children, and from them the first UK law about child neglect and cruelty was created.
Churches were also the first orphanages, opening their arms in the Middle Ages to unwanted children that were left at the Churches' doorsteps. This practice ultimately started the orphanage movements we have today. I could go on for hours listing the countless things Christianity has done for the world.
JoshRice forfeited this round.
Certainly Christianity is the largest single organization for healthcare in the world, but with over a billion members there aren"t many organizations that could offer that level of service, but that"s not to say they wouldn"t if possible. This has nothing to do with Christianity, this is a want to help your fellow man, an instinctive drive that all people and societies need in order for us to survive and evolve.
To dispute your point on the church starting the orphanage movement I will direct you to this piece from the writings of Plato, many hundreds of years before the church was helping orphans, by the way, no doubt they were orphans due to some war funded by the church. Plato (Laws, 927) says: "Orphans should be placed under the care of public guardians. Men should have a fear of the loneliness of orphans and of the souls of their departed parents. A man should love the unfortunate orphan of whom he is guardian as if he were his own child. He should be as careful and as diligent in the management of the orphan's property as of his own or even more careful still."(1)
Furthermore, you mention Jane Addams, but a recent study of her found that Jane Addams "had come to epitomize the force of secular humanism." Her image was, however, "reinvented" by the Christian churches.(2) Here we can see that you have fallen into a trap laid by the church, claiming that one of the brightest lights of humanity belonged to their ranks, when in reality Jane Addams was agnostic at best and indeed a secular humanist.
Now to quote you directly: "He (god) wants us to be loving and caring, and when humanity strays from those values, who is to blame? Not The Lord, but in fact ourselves."
Now this argument is heavily flawed to me, why should this apparent god receive praise for all the good humanity achieves, yet when something bad happens it"s the humans who are at fault, now to me that seems to be a slight double standard.
Now I will leave you with this. In mathematics a positive multiplied by a positive equals a positive, but, a negative multiplied by a positive equals a negative. So if we take all the negatives Christianity has done and all the positives and multiply them together, it is still a negative.
To put this in more simple terms imagine a serial killer with 50 innocent victims. Should he be forgiven because he did some charity work on the weekends? The answer is of course no.
Christianity is not a force for good in the world. The hatred found in Leviticus and the pedophilia dispersed in the places of worship are enough to see this on their own. Not to mention the other points I have raised. People are good and just enough already to need a bronze-age book dictating their lives.
(2)Christie, C., Gauvreau, M. (2001). A Full-Orbed Christianity: The Protestant Churches and Social Welfare in Canada, 1900-1940 McGill-Queen's Press - MQUP, Jan 19, 2001 pg 107
Beryllium forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by browley14 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||2||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Neither did a very good job and con was the only one to use a source.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.