The Instigator
Stupidape
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
brontoraptor
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Exterminate religion.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/19/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 393 times Debate No: 93897
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (13)
Votes (0)

 

Stupidape

Pro

Outline

I. Intro
II. Religious tribalism
III. Totalitarianism
IV. Praying instead of solving problems
V. Damaging to science
VI. Religion diverts goodwill
VII. Religion destroys personal responsibility
VIII. Sources


I. Intro

I one for see religion as a dangerous parasite that should be exterminated. At very young ages, perhaps even before birth we are indoctrinated. [1]

The reason I see religion as a parasite, is because all ideas are parasites.[2] Religion, seems like a particularly dangerous idea, thus a dangerous parasite.

There isn't enough to attack every religion, so I will only spend time on the largest three religions. Christianity, Islam, and Hinduism. All three have ridiculous double standards [3] within their religion texts.

Animals for Christianity, no souls and God giving dominion over man which leads to the horrible treatment of animals. Islam has double standards for non-believers/infidels. Hinduism frowns upon gays. [4] This is just the tip of the iceberg.

II. Religious tribalism

One of the main problems with religion is it promotes tribalism, this is so obvious I don't think this needs evidence to back it up unless my opponent deems it necessary. Impact, tribalism often leads to tensions, conflicts, and wars.


III. Totalitarianism


Two of the three largest religions have you bow down to only one. Meaning an autocracy. We all have read history lessons on how bad totalitarianism is.


IV. Praying instead of solving problems


This solution would work well if we could be reasonably sure God existed. The problem is we aren't. Governments must rely upon science to judge people. Since God doesn't exist scientifically, praying is a sorry excuse for dereliction of duty. [5]

This link isn't the only child who starved to death over religion. [6]


V. Damaging to science


The average twelve year old can figure out that evolution and creationism contradict each other. Same goes for biblical history versus generic history. Yet, it is difficult to hold onto two contradictory ideas, one must take precedence over the other. If we continue to think the Earth is flat, about 6,000 years old, and other contradictory ideas to science, we will miss out on many scientific discoveries.

VI. Religion diverts goodwill

People seem to think all charities are religious. Yet, there is no reason it has to be this way. Money that would be given to people in need is instead given to religions to promote themselves.

VII. Religion destroys personal responsibility

Religion teaches that all the events of your life are leading up to some great plan. Instead, of heading off problems, we are taught to pray, be pious, and let God take care of your problems. Yet, what about when events go terribly wrong? Do we blame ourselves? If yes, we blame ourselves for sinning as oppose to logic. So, instead of fixing the sour event, we pray for forgiveness for imaginary misdeeds.

If no, we keep on trucking, not taking any responsibility that we may have brought the terrible event on ourselves. We didn't bring down the problem by annoying God, but by simple more answers like not paying attention, neglecting a problem, and so forth. Therefore, we repeat our mistakes not learning and blaming God for our problems.

This seems especially important with global climate change. If we don't start acting right soon we are in serious trouble, at least in the world of science and evidence. Yet, in the religious world, who knows? Maybe God will save us or global climate change is caused by the mistreatment of cows. Yes, I talked to a Hindu and he believed global climate change was caused by sin, specifically the mistreatment of cows.

Thanks in advance for accepting this debate.

VIII. Sources

1. http://www.webmd.com...
2. http://www.idea-sandbox.com...
3. http://www.merriam-webster.com...
4. http://www.huffingtonpost.com...
5. http://atheism.about.com...
6. http://www.dallasnews.com...
brontoraptor

Con

We can't erdadicate religion because no human being would be left standing. Humans would be extinct.

Pro:
"One of the main problems with religion is it promotes tribalism, this is so obvious I don't think this needs evidence to back it up unless my opponent deems it necessary. Impact, tribalism often leads to tensions, conflicts, and wars."

This is true. And the religion of Atheism has caused more death in modern history than all other religions combined. The Religion forum of DDO is proof. Atheists make up 5% of the American population, yet they make up 90% of the Religion forum on DDO.

--

Pro:
"All three have ridiculous double standards within their religion texts."

This includes Atheism. One of the core arguments for the New Atheist Movement has been "Darwinian Evolution". Before it was pushed so hard in the 2000's, Atheists were very rare.

Darwinism and the "Survival of the fittest" was the key component to Nazi Arianism. It is also why Atheism has a very serious problem with heavy sexism.

Adolph Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. He referenced Darwinism regularly.

"Darwinism by itself did not produce the Holocaust, but without Darwinism, neither Hitler nor his Nazi followers would have had the necessary scientific underpinnings to convince themselves and their collaborators that one of the worlds greatest atrocities was really morally praiseworthy."
-Richard Weikart: "From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethic"

Darwinism was and is still simply a theory. Large sects of Atheists are convinced of the theory being true. This is similar to Christians who are sure that the Bible is right. Neither witnessed either phenomenon in real time, thus both are faith based positions.

"The stronger must dominate and not mate with the weaker, which would signify the sacrifice of its own higher nature. Only the born weakling can look upon this principle as cruel, and if he does so it is merely because he is of a feebler nature and narrower mind; for if such a law did not direct the process of evolution then the higher development of organic life would not be conceivable at all."
-Adolph Hitler: "Mein Kampf"

--

And this same principle and mindset has led to rampant sexism within the Atheist community.

Katie Engelhart ascribes the misogyny in New Atheism to the movement"s exclusively male leadership, who also happen to be men notorious for their sexism.

Buzzfeed"s Mark Oppenheimer detailed many accounts of sexism, sexual assault and coercion in his expose on the atheism movement. "Some women say they are now harassed or mocked at conventions, online attacks, and sexually assaulted by aggressive men."

http://qz.com...

http://the-orbit.net...

--

Pro:
"Praying instead of solving problems."

Very few Christians adhere to any such thinking. This is the equivalent to saying Atheism has a murder
problem because of Joseph Stalin.

--

Pro:
"The average twelve year old can figure out that evolution and creationism contradict each other."

By evolution Pro means Darwinian Evolution. Variation of species is a fact. Hooved hyenas becoming 80,000 pound whales is neither testable, measurable, or observable and does not meet the bare minimum of the scientific method. It also contradicts the fossil record and the Cambrian explosion, also excluding paleantologist finds of giant humans in this same record.

Nevertheless, even if darwinism were 100% factual, there is nothing that says a god couldn't have created the Darwinian system to give randomness to his creation rather than hand picking each quality.

--

Pro:
"Same goes for biblical history versus generic history."

Define "Biblical history". Many Christians take stories from the OT as allegories because Yeshua referenced Noah, Lot, Jonah, etc as allegories for the end of days and his ressurection. Every story Yeshua told was allegorical in the NT.

--

Pro:
"If we continue to think the Earth is flat, about 6,000 years old, and other contradictory ideas to science, we will miss out on many scientific discoveries."

I know no Christians or Muslims in my life who believe the above proposition.

(Job 26:7)
"He spreads out the heavens over empty space; he suspends the earth over nothing."

Pro:
"So, instead of fixing the sour event, we pray for forgiveness for imaginary misdeeds."

I know no Christians or Muslims in my life who adhere to any such ideological construct.

Pro:
"Therefore, we repeat our mistakes not learning and blaming God for our problems."

(The same as above)

--

Pro:
"Maybe God will save us."
(Global climate change)

Nope. No one will save it.

(2 Peter 3:10)
"The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the Earth will be laid bare.
Debate Round No. 1
Stupidape

Pro

"We can't eradicate religion because no human being would be left standing. Humans would be extinct." brontoraptor

I don't understand how you came to this conclusion. I said we need to target the parasite afflicting humans, not humans. To the best of my knowledge this would have no affect on human population. I didn't explain how, instead focusing on why.

Let's focus on how. First the extermination would have to be peaceful considering there are more believers than non-believers force would not only be ineffective, but counter productive. If Atheists decided to take baseball bats and beat all the believers into submission, it would only galvanize the religious communities.

Secondly, positive social change happens slowly as opposed to quickly. People get scared when events occur too rapidly. A reasonable time frame for how hard it would be to eradicate religion would be between 200-500 years. That being said the usual methods of positive social change. Arguing with strangers on the internet, waving signs around, and so forth. There is no getting around it, religion is tougher than nails and to do something right takes time.

The idea behind this would be religion would slowly fade away as opposed to a sudden dramatic event. So, to counter your point, exterminating religion would not cause the end of the human race. We will probably die from global climate change before hand, but hey, we gotta try.

"This is true. And the religion of Atheism has caused more death in modern history than all other religions combined. The Religion forum of DDO is proof. Atheists make up 5% of the American population, yet they make up 90% of the Religion forum on DDO." Brontoraptor

First, I would not classify Atheism as a religion. [7] Secondly, many of the world's smartest people are atheists. Stephen Hawkings for example. [8] Third, this is a debate website and people like to win arguments. Therefore, the disproportionate amount of Atheists may simply mean that the Atheist position is stronger on a debate site.

"This includes Atheism. One of the core arguments for the New Atheist Movement has been "Darwinian Evolution". Before it was pushed so hard in the 2000's, Atheists were very rare.

Darwinism and the "Survival of the fittest" was the key component to Nazi Arianism. It is also why Atheism has a very serious problem with heavy sexism." Brontoraptor

Seems like your strategy is the best defense is a good offense. Atheist has its problems believe me. You can probably guess I push for vegan principles. I've found some of the most diehard opponents of veganism claim to be atheists and quote over and over and over survival of the fittest. Honestly these people scare me. They seem to have their own version of dogma. At least with a vegan or a religious person they can claim they are trying to promote good in the world.

Therefore, I'm not sure if Atheist has problems with heavy sexism, this is the first I've heard of it, but it does not surprise me do to my battles with atheists over animal rights. Sadly, it seems you are correct about sexism. "Many of the most prominent leaders of the New Atheism are quick to express deeply sexist ideas." [10] There will be bad apples in any group of people.


"Adolph Hitler believed that the human gene pool could be improved by using selective breeding similar to how farmers breed superior cattle strains. He referenced Darwinism regularly.

"Darwinism by itself did not produce the Holocaust, but without Darwinism, neither Hitler nor his Nazi followers would have had the necessary scientific underpinnings to convince themselves and their collaborators that one of the worlds greatest atrocities was really morally praiseworthy."
-Richard Weikart: "From Darwin to Hitler: Evolutionary Ethic"" Brotoraptor

Science has been used for many evil purposes just as religion has. The difference with science is once the cat is out of the bag, it is out. You can't simply stuff science back in a bag and call it a day. We have a better shot at stopping religion than science.

"Darwinism was and is still simply a theory. Large sects of Atheists are convinced of the theory being true. This is similar to Christians who are sure that the Bible is right. Neither witnessed either phenomenon in real time, thus both are faith based positions." Brotoraptor

Then, you A don't understand science or B are hoping I know very little about science so I don't call you on this. Science is based upon objectivity and evidence. As for not witnessing in real time, the same could be said for Abiogensis, the big bang theory, and the multiverse theory. Since, nobody was there at the beginning to witness in real time. Yet, these are all considered scientific theories.

Going to run out of text if I quote you on everything, but again somebody used objective scientific truth for nefarious purposes. As I said before, I don't get the sexism in the new atheist movement, but it seems very similar to the anti-animal statements. I honestly, cannot figure these people out for the life of me. Trust me, most people see me as a militant vegan and I can't penetrate their defenses. To be fair there is plenty of sexist and anti-animal believers. Just look at Saudia Arabia. Perhaps the real question is which has more sexism, religious people or atheist?

""Praying instead of solving problems."

Very few Christians adhere to any such thinking. This is the equivalent to saying Atheism has a murder
problem because of Joseph Stalin." Brotoraptor

Would be difficult to prove anyways, but you know its possible. I would say Joseph Stalin set back atheism at least one hundred years.

"By evolution Pro means Darwinian Evolution. Variation of species is a fact. Hooved hyenas becoming 80,000 pound whales is neither testable, measurable, or observable and does not meet the bare minimum of the scientific method. Brotoraptor

We can't test such a large variation of species. Yet, archaeologists are filling in more and more of the missing links. We can test many of the intermediate steps by testing DNA.

"It also contradicts the fossil record and the Cambrian explosion, also excluding paleantologist finds of giant humans in this same record." Brotoraptor

Never heard of it, you need a warrant for this claim because its not common knowledge.

"Nevertheless, even if darwinism were 100% factual, there is nothing that says a god couldn't have created the Darwinian system to give randomness to his creation rather than hand picking each quality." Brotoraptor

That seems like a Deism argument. While true we can't disprove God, and therefore God could have performed those actions, scientifically God doesn't exist.

Less than 800 characters. Many people would see Noah, Jonah, etc as literally true and part of Biblical history.

There are still flat Earth people. [11]

"Nope. No one will save it.

(2 Peter 3:10)
"The heavens will disappear with a roar; the elements will be destroyed by fire, and the Earth will be laid bare."

There will always be some who disbelieve, and they will this as buying out. The Earth will be destroyed, so let's cut down all the rain forests. Kinda of difficult for people who like animals. Besides many Christians are against global warming/climate change. [12] Thanks for debate.


Sources
7. http://atheism.about.com...
8. http://www.nbcnews.com...
9. http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
10. http://www.salon.com...
11. http://www.livescience.com...
12. http://www.inquisitr.com...
brontoraptor

Con

Pro:
"we need to target the parasite afflicting humans."

Of which most of humanity agrees is Atheism. Notice at the height of wealth, balance, and safety, America was heavily Christian. The New Atheist Movement became prevelant in the 2000's and morality, balanced wealth, and security went into free fall. Atheism has no unifying effect because it has no beliefs, thus no commonality in its flock, just biological effect. It's a view with no meaning or purpose, nor good or evil, but simply pitiless indifference.

--

Pro:
"There is no getting around it, religion is tougher than nails."

This is because standing for nothing while sitting around waiting to die is:

1)Psychologically destructive

2)A sufficating of the psychological hierarchy of needs

3)Irrational per Pascal's Wager

4)Void of meaning or purpose

5)The mindset of someone who has given up and accepted defeat.

6)A negative belief system

7)Child abuse by indoctrination of a negative, defeated belief system void of meaning or purpose.

8)A belief that has escalated suicide as it grows.

https://www.washingtonpost.com...

http://www.befrienders.org...

http://www.cnn.com...

--

Pro:
"First, I would not classify Atheism as a religion."

Atheism has:

1)Churches
2)Passing out of pamphlets
3)Tithing
4)Faith

http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

http://www.youngcons.com...

http://www.atheistrev.com...

--

Pro:
"many of the world's smartest people are atheists."

Of the 10 highest IQ's at least 8 are known theists and 6 are Christians.

http://www.freerepublic.com...

http://www.scottmsullivan.com...

--

Pro:
"We have a better shot at stopping religion than science."

I disagree. Once New Atheism took over much of science, firing anyone who challenged concepts that adhered to atheism, mocking and ridiculing creationism even when not attached to a religion, was caught with fraudulant "finds", and secular scientists such as David Berlinski claimed Atheism was using dogma to influence findings and results, many agnostics and theists quit blindly accepting anything "science" says. This kind of "Science" isn't taken seriously by the majority anymore.

Pro:
"The difference with science is once the cat is out of the bag, it is out."

Most of aren't convinced it was a cat that jumped out of that bag, but a shape shifting cameleon.

Was it this cat?

http://www.debate.org...

--

Pro:
"Science is based upon objectivity and evidence."

Exactly. Darwinism does not meet the bare minimal of the requirements of the scientific method. It is not observable, testable, or measurable. Many claim variation within a species is not darwinism but simply variation within the programmed construct of the said species or kingdom. For example, bacteria cannot become something other than bacteria. They can show variations available to bacteria, but not qualities of a dog or bird. Even Darwin thought of the fossil record as the enemy of his theory. Darwinism looks completely past the Cambrian Explosion and many giant human skeletons found.

http://www.don-lindsay-archive.org...

"And I suppose it's possible that you might find evidence for that if you look at the details of biochemistry, molecular biology, you might find a signature of some sort of designer."
--Richard Dawkins, Atheist, author of "The God Delusion"

http://www.conservapedia.com...

--

Pro:
"Just look at Saudia Arabia. Perhaps the real question is which has more sexism, religious people or atheist?"

If you want to rid the world of Islam, be my guest. But Christianity and Islam are completely opposite teachings. Compare their infallable leaders.

*Muhammed- Kill unbelievers
*Jesus-"Loveyour enemies

*Muhammed-Eye for an eye
*Jesus-Turn the other cheek

---

Comparative link-

http://www.thereligionofpeace.com...

---

Pro:
"warrant for this claim."

Giant 'humans'-

http://therundownlive.com...

--

Con:
"cut down all the rain forests."

And of a godless lack of divine accountability?

--

Pro:
"scientifically God doesn't exist."

I disagree. I think it's headed in the opposite direction. Biology was discriminately used to try and "help" militant Atheism. Physics is heading us the other way. Have you ever studied James Gates?

http://theawakenment.com...
Debate Round No. 2
Stupidape

Pro

"Of which most of humanity agrees is Atheism. Notice at the height of wealth, balance, and safety, America was heavily Christian. The New Atheist Movement became prevelant in the 2000's and morality, balanced wealth, and security went into free fall." Brontoraptor

I don't see how Atheism is any different than believing in a different religion. For example Christians must reject Allah and Muslims must reject Jesus Christ. Same with Jews, they must reject Jesus Christ and Allah. This makes no sense to me. One of the first concepts any person learns with monotheism is to put no other God before me.

As for the correlations between the New Atheist Movement, they are just that correlations, and unscientific at that, since you drew your own conclusions. There could be any number of confounding factors and reverse causality. Pollution could be a confounding factor that increases both Atheism and decreased morality, balanced wealth, and security. Reverse causality means that decreased morality, balanced wealth, and security could have caused an increase in atheism.

Since we don't know how many confounding factors there are, your assumptions have less than 33% chance of being correct.

"Atheism has no unifying effect because it has no beliefs, thus no commonality in its flock, just biological effect. It's a view with no meaning or purpose, nor good or evil, but simply pitiless indifference." Brotoraptor

While that is true of some Atheists, not all are that way. Furthermore, factory farming is rampant now, and Christianity is the largest religion with over two billion followers. It is very difficult for me to hold Christians beliefs once I've seen the horrors of factory farming. In fact, this is my main reason or motive for wanting to exterminate religion.

"This is because standing for nothing while sitting around waiting to die is:" Brotoraptor

That's what my one friend who is heavily Christian says Christianity is about. Go to church, pray some, and wait to die, and go to heaven. At least I can claim I am trying to save the meek by trying to save animals. I am in agreement that standing for nothing is destructive. But, that's the point there is no good reason why an Atheist would stand for nothing. You can stand for truth, animal rights, sexual equality, gay rights, racial equality, and more.

"8)A belief that has escalated suicide as it grows." Brontoraptor

There are many confounding factors for this and therefore alternative explanations. Pollution, terrorist attacks, GMOs, etc. The point is taking wild stabs in the dark like you are doing is not helping.

"Atheism has:

1)Churches
2)Passing out of pamphlets
3)Tithing
4)Faith" Brontoraptor

Can you blame people for wanting a sense of community and wanting to hang out with people with similar values? I still would not call Atheism a religion, though some people seem to want it to be a religion.

"Pro:
"many of the world's smartest people are atheists."

Of the 10 highest IQ's at least 8 are known theists and 6 are Christians." Brontoraptor

Christians have the highest numbers.

http://www.therichest.com...

"David Berlinski claimed Atheism was using dogma to influence findings and results, many agnostics and theists quit blindly accepting anything "science" says." Brontoraptor

There will always be bad apples. I have unconventional opinions in other areas, for example I'm an anti-vaccine due to the animal cruelty involved. I get mocked a lot for this opinion. I still don't understand where the disrespect for animals is coming from, there is no logical explanation I can find.

"Most of aren't convinced it was a cat that jumped out of that bag, but a shape shifting cameleon.

Was it this cat?" Brontoraptor

Believe me Islam is first on my priority list for a religion to exterminate. After enough terrorists attacks I had to stop protesting animal rights. I didn't feel safe protesting factory farming anymore.

"Darwinism looks completely past the Cambrian Explosion and many giant human skeletons found." Brontoraptor

I'm not sold on the giant human skeletons. I'm sorry that is just too far fetched for me to absorb at this junction. As for the Cambrian Explosion, weird, but doesn't disprove Darwin's theory. Also, I don't see how Darwin's theory fails to meet the minimum scientific requirements. We can observe species alive today that reassemble ancient species. We can measure the age of fossils with carbon dating techniques. Scientists can perform DNA tests on subjects to verify DNA mutations.

Yes, there is a small chance God exists or there was a designer of some sort, but we haven't found any evidence of that yet.

"But Christianity and Islam are completely opposite teachings. " Brontoraptor

Christianity also has the idea of eternal damnation. The flesh burning away, only to regenerate and be burned away again forever. Seven year old children being condemned to this fate simply because their parents choose the wrong religion. We can see how much Jesus loved children.

"And of a godless lack of divine accountability?" Brontoraptor

As I see it, Christianity allows for ruthless business enterprises to destroy the environment. Don't worry Jesus Christ paid for your sins already, so feel free to turn this world into a hot, ugly, cesspool, by destroying the world via global climate change. God gave us dominion over nature and no souls to animals. So, therefore animals and nature are there to crush underneath our heels. This is how I view Christianity. Sounds like Hell to me.

Kind of ironic is it not? That by giving dominion to man over animals and nature, giving humans souls but not animals, and taking all the sin onto himself that Jesus has paved the way for humans to destroy nature and turn Earth into Hell guilt free. Why not? With all that money from deforestation and factory farming we can build churches in Hell while we are it. Jesus will forgive us.

This is exactly the type of bull manure that religion promotes. This is why I want to exterminate religion. For the trees, for the animals, for racial equality, gender equality, and overall human and animal happiness and welfare. The last few terrorist attacks were the last straw. I've seen religion for what it is. ISIS (Islamic state of Iraq) is religion incarnate, religion at its most purest, the quintessence of religion. Religion in my opinion is evil, and I will attempt to destroy what I view as evil.

Thanks for the debate, was interesting.

http://www.pbs.org...
brontoraptor

Con

"This makes no sense to me."

If you study theology it does. The Jews await a Messiah who never came. They received prophecy after prophecy of the messiah. Jesus was born. They never received a prophecy again. Jesus is the fulfillment of Judaism. Islam is the fulfillment of the Antichrist system in Judaism and Christianity. Jews and Christians await God in human form to come and fight the Antichrist system.

Here is my one round debate with a Muslim. Notice he retreated because he knows I'm right.


--

Pro:

"At least I can claim I am trying to save the meek by trying to save animals."

In Christianity this a false morality. Meaning? To be very imperfect, yet claim your own goodness, isn't really goodness but "falling from grace", thus being condemned by the law by using the law to justify yourself via self righteousness. This is why you cannot find any post where I claim a "moral highground" on atheists or anyone else.

(John 9:41)

Jesus said, "If you were blind, you would not be guilty of sin; but now that you claim you can see, your guilt remains.

--

Pro:

"You can stand for truth."

What is truth?

--

"I still would not call Atheism a religion."

Atheism is a "lack of belief" is a dodge. Atheism is the belief that God does not exist.

If I say that the letter "F" is symmetrical, and you say you do not believe the letter "F" is symmetrical, you believe it is asymmetrical.

Theism=I believe a God exists.

Atheism=I believe no God exists.

(Christopher Hitchens flummixed by this concept)(Video)


--

Pro:

"Christians have the highest numbers."

True. But it puts the "look how smart Stephen Hawking is" rebuttle to rest.

--

Pro:

"I'm not sold on the giant human skeletons. I'm sorry that is just too far fetched for me to absorb at this junction."

That's what I thought when Darwinists said whales used to walk and 80,000 pound whales evolved from hyenas...ahem...

--

Pro:

"We can observe species alive today that reassemble ancient species."

They've found creatures trapped in amber that are hundreds of millions of years old that look identical today. The Cambrian was only 500 million years ago. At that rate, getting millions of transitions seems like a fairytale.

--

Pro:

"We can measure the age of fossils with carbon dating techniques."

With nothing to zero out with. It assumes all variables were the same at all points in history. It's a guess that hopes its first asdumption was spot on. If the assumption is not, the dating is a random number. Carbon dating is only accurate back a few thousand years. This is the farse of carbon dating methods.

--

Pro:

"we haven't found any evidence of that yet."

I can post you a hundred proofs but to simplify to the space left, I'll introduce you to James Gates.

(Short interview with Gates-video)


--

"Christianity also has the idea of eternal damnation. The flesh burning away, only to regenerate and be burned away again forever. Seven year old children being condemned to this fate simply because their parents choose the wrong religion. We can see how much Jesus loved children."

The first part of "eternal damnation" is foreign to me. Children go to Heaven. They aren't accountable as children yet. The same with those who cannot understand by being slow, etc. The only ones with no excuse are adults who know the difference like you and I.


--

Pro:

"so feel free to turn this world into a hot, ugly, cesspool."

This is not typical "Christian thinking", but the same argument applies to a godless, unaccountable mindset.

--

Pro:

"God gave us dominion over nature and no souls to animals."

Atheists don't believe animals have souls.

--

Pro:

"giving humans souls but not animals."

Verse citation needed. I've never heard of it.

--

Pro:

"Factory Farming"

You are assuming all so named "Christians" actually care about God, nature, morality, etc. Claiming Christianity as your religion is no path to Christ or salvation according to himself. Grace by faith.

--

Pro:

The last few terrorist attacks were the last straw. I've seen religion for what it is."

This is a complete false dichotomy. The wrongs of Islam have less to do with Christianity than the massacres of atheist dictators have do with Atheism. I already provided you a link in the last round comparing the religions. They are opposite. Jihad, cliphate, taqiya, maruna, kitman, and tawriya are Islamic terms that are the opposite of the teachings of Christ. His teaching was essentially like Janeism.

--

Pro:

"and I will attempt to destroy what I view as evil."

To call good evil and evil good is? Evil. To do so is to face the judgement. To lump Christianity and Islam together as "religion" is intellectual dishonesty and blatantly wrong. There are no "Christian suicide bombers" just as there are no "Atheist suicide bombers". By your assessment, Atheism and Islam can be lumped into the exact same category by my ignorance. They are pretty much the same. it's an obviously ridiculous assertion.
Debate Round No. 3
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by brontoraptor 7 months ago
brontoraptor
@stupidape

It shouldn't. They're your kin. They must have came from apes.
Posted by whiteflame 7 months ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: warren42// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Con (Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Both were quite civil S&G: I only noticed one error on Pro ("s" at the end of Hawking) and none on Con (may have missed some, not certain) but either way, neither was egregious. Arguments and sourcing were tied to one another. Both had a variety of sources supplemented by personal/and or anecdotal examples. I think Pro relied more heavily on anecdotes, and therefore had a weaker platform. This swung both arguments and sources Con.

[*Reason for removal*] Arguments and sources are insufficiently explained. The voter states that the only factor that affected their votes was a reliance on anecdotes by one of the sides. While that may, indeed, be a sufficient reason to award these points, the voter has to do more than vaguely state that this is the justification for their vote. This requires specific analysis of arguments made by both sides, clear reasoning for why Pro's argument was more reliant on anecdotes, and a reason why anecdotal evidence should be deemed as lesser. If much of that analysis is in the debate, referring to that analysis would be enough.
************************************************************************
Posted by Stupidape 7 months ago
Stupidape
"@stupidape

I'm not upset. Are you upset?"

Actually, the giant skeletons are beyond bizarre. That does upset me.
Posted by Stupidape 7 months ago
Stupidape
Surprised I lost, thought I had the easier argument. I think I just need to sharpen my debate skills.
Posted by brontoraptor 7 months ago
brontoraptor
@stupidape

I'm not upset. Are you upset?
Posted by brontoraptor 7 months ago
brontoraptor
They keep finding them everywhere worldwide. Snopes is an unreliable source. It's ran by a liberal couple that could use some baking soda on those teeth. Just saying. This is the same snopes that claims the shahada ring on Obama's finger isn't a Shahada ring despite Arabs and ex Muslims saying it is. Just sayin..
Posted by Stupidape 7 months ago
Stupidape
As for the giant skeletons. "In any case, we don't need to know the specific origins of these photos to definitively determine that they're fakes. The square-cube law makes it a physical impossibility that humanoids of the size represented by these bones could ever have existed."

http://www.snopes.com...
Posted by Stupidape 7 months ago
Stupidape
Its interesting that if you think God doesn't exist, that gets little attention. Yet, if you decide hey, if God doesn't exist, why in the world do we have religion, lets get rid of it, people get upset. I don't get it. I mean isn't that the next logical step? Anyways, I still think religion causes more harm than good, so I'd be willing to debate the subject again at a later time.
Posted by Agingseeker 7 months ago
Agingseeker
I would support exterminating all people like you. And for one reason. You are cowards and dumb.

Proof of both. If I just said ' I think X' and without telling you what X is asked you whether I should be punished for it you would say 'No' In fact, in your own life you've probably met a thousand people socially that were religious and you didn't know it. Would you turn your friendship to violence upon finding out? well ,then you are a coward.

As to dumb. Will you admit that there have been brilliant folk, benefactors of humanity many of them, who on REASON ALONE were convinced there is a god (historically a sizable number were not members of any religion at all) so would you dare to say, You are lying, you don't have any grounds?

No you wouldn't and couldn't, so you are dumb too

And I will bet you can't define religion without mentioning God so I have you by your scruffy rect um.
Posted by Agingseeker 7 months ago
Agingseeker
Tell me how you exterminate anything without exterminating people. If I say 'I think X' and you say "but I think Y' both should stand unless somehow you are better than me. But you aren't. So, my Catholicism is not your business and you would have to exterminate me to accomplish your goal as it applies to me.
And who defines 'religion'. Is knowing there is a God -- is that religion? So now you can't even think your way to a conclusion that is unacceptable.

Remember. if you think you have reason and truth on your side then convince others, don't kill them.

Pope Benedict was totally right, we should call for Freedom of Conscience.

" Violence is incompatible with the nature of God and the nature of the soul. "God," he says, "is not pleased by blood - and not acting reasonably is contrary to God's nature. Faith is born of the soul, not the body. Whoever would lead someone to faith needs the ability to speak well and to reason properly, without violence and threats."

When you start forcing people to do what is against their conscience, you are headed to the jungle.
No votes have been placed for this debate.