The Instigator
CaptainDogma
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ariesx
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points

Everyone should have a religion

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Ariesx
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/13/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,321 times Debate No: 65015
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

CaptainDogma

Con

If you will take this debate put "ACCEPT" and then make your argument. If not simply put "DENIED" and just leave it there. Now for the rules:ROUND 1:ARGUMENT PHASE this round isn't worth any points, but it will start things up. We're not making any rebuttals, but we are making our own argument. ROUND 2:REBUTTAL STAGE this round is worth 2 points for whoever refutes more points.ROUND 3:ARGUMENT PHASE(2) this round IS worth points and it's all about execution, and whoever makes the more compelling argument in this round.ROUND 4:REBUTTAL STAGE(2) this round the same as 2 refute the arguments from the previous round, whoever refutes more 2 points, who can ever make the most compelling argument without having to use some source and explain in their own words 2 points. Good grammar 1 point. GENERAL RULES:Sources are allowed but only in argument rounds, and you're only allowed 3 sources, anymore and points will be deducted. (-3) No ad hominem attacks, and eluding to personal attacks. (-1)No fallacious arguments(-2 points) THANK YOU ________________________________________________________________________________________________ARGUMENT:I do not believe everyone should be religious, I think people should be free to follow whatever they believe, I am agnostic and find more comfort in the bordering instead of subscribing to one system of belief. I find philosophy over religion to be far more interesting, religion is interesting but I will not subscribe to something if my heart is not in it.
Ariesx

Pro

I believe that everybody should be religious, because of the benefits of religion. As we look in the middle ages, we saw illiteracy, poverty, inequality, women being thrown away like trash. Jesus came and taught treat everyone like you treat yourself. Love your neighbor like you love yourself. These were all things can calmed society. Prophet Muhammad came, and taught peace. There are consequences for throwing women into the dirt. Muhammad stressed education in his long seminars. People should welcome these things into society. These benefits led to western society. Don't throw these things away. We will go back to the middle ages.
Debate Round No. 1
CaptainDogma

Con

I think people should be free to believe whatever they want, because religion might have benefits but it also has cause countless wars, genocides, and predjudices, the advancement of technology and many technical sciences came from people of a free thinking mind that explored outside the realms of a faith. Claiming only people who with a faith can be moral is a highly over used fallacy. Religion came about people having a fear of death and wanting to communicate with those who have passed on, and trying to find an explaination for things they cannot explain, because as humans we desire to understand, you could say it's a blessing(gift) and a curse of being the most self-aware mammal. I also would like to add darwinism has explained a lot more, than most faiths have. Religion does bring interesting stories, but for the most part, that's what they are, stories. I would like to pose a question "Does having a religion make it okay?" by this I mean if you have a book said to be created by gods, and in this book it says to commit actions you might consider immoral, does that then make it moral?
Ariesx

Pro

Christianity's population is around 2.5 billion people. Islam's population is around 1.5 billion people. Hinduism's population is 1 billion people. Buddhism has 500 million people. There is another 58 million that are followers for other religions. Religion now has the job to control all of these people. Of course, there are going to be genocide, prejudices, and wars. Religion is controlling over 5 billion people. Islam also stressed in the Quran the importance of science, and education. Since Islam was so big, the beliefs became corrupted. Religion gives people a moral foundation. I won't argue with the science of God being accurate, but I will argue that the moral foundation it creates is viable. Scientific advancement is good for our society. I also bet that you accept that America is getting more secularized. and I assume that you think that this is a good thing. According to BusinessWeek, the average student spends less than an hour on homework. 70% of teachers are also don't care about there students. In the 1900s when America was more religious, the average student spend 3 hours of school work a day. 95% of the teachers cared for the students. Religion brought these benefits. Our secularized generation is doing horribly compared to this generation. Elders are respected in the religious age of America. The new generation on the other hand loves to revolt. Religion can solve our problems. It can create a moral society. Lastly, I would like to answer your question. Christianity, Islam, Hinduism, and Buddhism are the most widely accepted. We are not in the era in where people make a rule saying something absurd or else these religions would be gone. Christianity teaches treating others the way you want to be treated. Islam promotes peace, and equality. Hinduism promotes fairness, and order. Buddhism teaches more natural things. I would love to live in a society in where everybody followed these rules. We see in a secularized, bias against religion society that kids don't care about work. Disrespect there parents.

http://www.pewforum.org...
http://www.cnn.com...
Debate Round No. 2
CaptainDogma

Con

I'd like to commend my opponent for staying consistent for the first phase of the debate.

Now religion does have it's benefits, and if religions understand why secularism can benefit some of society, why try to force everyone to believe in something they don't want to or feel no need to? I don't see a benefit to that, those who have a hard time believing in a particular religion shouldn't belong to it. Unless of course you're saying people should be free to create their own religions, secularism and religion has done a fine enough job co-existing. No I have nothing against anyone with a religion, but I do stand against forcing beliefs on someone that they didn't ask for, we've got laws and regulations to help create a moral standard. Common sense helps create morals. There will still be people who defy things, society will never be perfect, no amount religious conquest will change that.

http://www.secularism.org.uk...

http://www.flatheadsecular.com...
Ariesx

Pro

I think that me and my opponent can agree on having grudges on people that don't believe the same principles that you believe. I agree that we can never create a perfect society. But what I am arguing is that religion helps humans with morality. If you live a moral life, you can get rewards in the next life. I am not going to try to argue if afterlife is right nor not, but I will say that it helps humans with there morals. It helps humans. I think that me and my opponent can also agree that morality benefits society. I have stated many times in this debate that religion helps people with morality. If there is anything that will help morality, than we should run it. But secularism is ruining our society. Even though secularism can lead to scientific advancements, I believe that religions' benefits outweigh the benefits of secularism, because there are so many harms to secularism. The statistics that I have provided up in Round 2 are just a few harms.
Debate Round No. 3
CaptainDogma

Con

I think that me and my opponent can agree on having grudges on people that don't believe the same principles that you believe.

To some extent my opponent might be right, but on that same note they could be wrong, let's say me an Agnostic male, and I'm going to assume my opponent is religious, this is just for making a point. If you asked me what religion I think you should follow, I would honestly tell you, to follow whatever one you think is consistent with your core principles, but religion requires faith in some kind of power, faith is faith, it is much different than just trusting in the humanity of people.

Now religion is a very interesting thing, I will admit as I'm sure I have already stated before, however, we might live in a society that seems more secular, but the majority of population already claims to be religious. I'd say that's probably due to peer pressure in society, and the stigma that if you don't have a religion, than you are what's wrong with the world, evne if you've done nothing wrong. Letting people have free thought and find their own belief systems achieves more than forcing them all to have the same exact one. You didn't find greatness in painting the same thing as everyone else now did you? I believe the benefits of a society that has both religion and secularism co-exist outweigh the benefits of just one existing. You get to better places, and find out where your weak points lie, when you have someone else to challenge them. When you're separating things, you usually separate it by it's characteristics, and such. I know religion will never disappear (nor do I actually want it to) but secularism will only continue to grow. It's not the main thing in the world, it's just become more prominent compared to what it was years ago. People should examine all mind sets, forcing people to only have one kind of mind set is going against a human's ability to have free will. Morals do make a better society, I do agree with my opponent on that point. HOWEVER morals are a human construct, and not entirely a biological imperative like eating, sleeping, or sex.

Therefore, I feel a good enough case has not been made for why everyone should have a religion. It would take more than morals, and high rate of people who believe in it, to convince me otherwise.
Ariesx

Pro

I would like to note that I have enjoyed this debate. I believe that my opponent is very intelligent, and open minded.
My opponent says in the previous argument that you should follow the faith that is consistent with your core principles. By using his logic, if I kill or steal for the BENIFIT of myself, than I should go find a faith that agrees with that. I would say that claim is completely absurd. That is exactly why we need religion. It keeps our society from not going to the middle ages, to the Darwinian time.

My opponent also seems to go my his experience when he says "society seems more secular, but the majority of population claims its religious". I have put real evidence, and poles on the internet finding that most of America is non-religious. My opponent agrees with moral making a better society. So all I have to say is welcome religion. Let religion create a moral foundation for people.

I have also provided statistics, and evidence for a secularized America doing poorly, and a religious America doing exceptionally well. The average student spends less than an hour on homework. 70% of teachers in America don't care about the kids. Than we looked at the religious time of America. The average student spent 3 hours on school work. 95% of teachers actually cared. Education worked in a religious society.

I hope that the voter judge these arguments objectively. Vote pro, because I have provided actual evidence of religion out-performing a secularized society. I have also proved that my opponent is also basing his debate off of experience which makes him more unreliable. Vote for Pro because pro had more logic, and evidence to back up thee claims.

I would also like to thank my opponent for making this debate possible. It has been fun. Thanks.
Debate Round No. 4
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Stefy 2 years ago
Stefy
My use of "you" was just a use of general second person. My statement was not meant to be directed at anyone in particular.
Posted by Stefy 2 years ago
Stefy
I'm religious but everyone should do what they feel is right for them. No one "should" do something just because it is working for you in your life.
Posted by CaptainDogma 2 years ago
CaptainDogma
I'd like to elaborate that religion is perfectly fine, but I don't think people should really be forced into a faith. Because that is what makes it a faith, have a personal belief in it's core principles.
Posted by Ariesx 2 years ago
Ariesx
Hey if you guys liked my approach of debating, and though that my arguments were pretty effective, than you guys can follow my twitter profile https://twitter.com...
Posted by ELDRITCH 2 years ago
ELDRITCH
Religion isn't necessary. Respect for fellow human beings is. People get the two confused because the first often claims to advocate for the second. Any benefit religion gives can be gained secularly.
Posted by Ariesx 2 years ago
Ariesx
Accept
Posted by sherrydo 2 years ago
sherrydo
Hmmm, its a good argument..religion should not be mandatory because it is merely a belief in a superior being and thus leads to other factors such as worship etc. However religion should not be ruled out for the simple purpose of retaining order..without religion,life would be chaos
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Emilrose 2 years ago
Emilrose
CaptainDogmaAriesxTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both debaters presented relatively strong arguments--with Con highlighting that not everyone should "be religious" or subscribe to a particular religious group. Despite the fact religion can be beneficial to society (as Pro also outlines) secular people can practice morality without religion playing an active role in their life. Again, Con points out that above all people should have the ability to chose what--and what not--they wish to believe in. Pro argues that moral and scientific advancement is attributed to primarily to religion, which has not necessarily always been the case. Science in particular has largely benefited from secular belief systems. Both used sources so the vote is tied in this area.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
CaptainDogmaAriesxTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: very, very close. But through the debate, pro uses sources and studies to show secular people doing better than non-secular people, and manages to sufficiently rebut whatever con has to say.
Vote Placed by areneotero 2 years ago
areneotero
CaptainDogmaAriesxTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I will admit, this is a VERY hard debate to snag on debate .org, but Ariesx definitely nailed it, finding reliable sources and making a good point in general.