The Instigator
LepreKaunz
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
NiamC
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Is Christianity Detrimental to the Advancement of Society?

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 2 votes the winner is...
NiamC
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/1/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 735 times Debate No: 55880
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

LepreKaunz

Pro

I believe that Christianity is detrimental to the development of humanity for a number of reasons pertaining to their fundamentalist, doctrines, and beliefs. I am willing to present a well reasoned argument in defense of my statement, if an opponent can do the same,
NiamC

Con

I accept

I look forwards to the next round.
Debate Round No. 1
LepreKaunz

Pro

Christianity is openly rejecting proven facts on the basis of one book that was written hundreds of years after the events it describes. Christians have attacked gays because they claim that homosexuality and homosexual marriage is unnatural. Marriage itself is unnatural. It was created as a way to keep women from straying from their husbands. and when is the last time you saw two sparrows gather all their sparrow friends and dress up and hold a wedding? Never! And if homosexuality if unnatural, than why have over 1500 species been documented to partake in homosexual acts. in fact, black swans will often form three some with a female and drive her off once she's laid her eggs. As well as sheep, amazon dolphins, american bison, bonobos, and multiple species of monkeys and many many more. And this clearly proves homosexuality is natural as it is documented throughout history. Christianity also tells people to pray for others who are ill. And while this a good attempt at helping it is one hundred percent useless! People will pray and chalk it up as a good deed for the day and leave it at that, without actually having helped anything at all. Some young children are taught to throw away their lives in the pursuit of following an invisible magic man in the sky who loves you, but will also cast you into a hole where you will burn and suffer and cry if you do something he doesn't like. Frankly, who the hell cares if you think about having sex with someone. or steal something, because the book tells you to let go of worldly possessions. Also, people are condemned for using birth control! Sex is one of the most primal instincts in all life! The pope in 2010 went to Africa, the continent most ravaged by AIDS and told them not to use condoms! Stem cells are not babies! they are what the body uses for evolution, because you can overwrite them and fix and improve things in the body. "No abortions!" they cry! An infinitesimal speck of goo in a women's uterus is not a baby. once it's too late to abort then yes, arguably it is a baby, but it's a women's choice. The world we live in has been so compartmentalized that a child now isn't a wise idea. there is proof of evolution, why the moon is where it is, why the sun is where it is, why the tides go in and out, but some power hungry MORON is going to have innocent people waste their lives on ONE BOOK. One book that says the big magic man in the sky created the Earth. for no particular reason, and this magic man has existed forever, but only now six thousand years ago did he create a world upon which he would exercise narcissistic need for power over people. then the magic man created the sun and the moon and inexplicably creates life. We first discovered dinosaurs just one hundred and thirty freakin' years ago, and we lived with them for the first several thousand, and when the great flood came along they all died! why didn't Noah save two dinosaurs of every type? why only animals? well because we didn't know about them until we discovered them, even though people claim it to be a "fully comprehensive book"
NiamC

Con

Ok, let’s go! I would like to just say that your opening argument would be a lot easy to read if it was in paragraphs... I will begin to rebut and refuted your opening argument.


“Christianity is openly rejecting proven facts on the basis of one book that was written hundreds of years after the events it describes.”


This is a stigmatisation upon the said whole of Christianity followers. There are cases of some who has dedicated their lives to their faith and may become hostile to those who deny that person’s faith, but not all


It is not true that all Christians reject these facts. I am Christian, but I believe in what makes the most sense – evolution etc.


This seems very much like your own point of view of Christianity.


“Christians have attacked gays because they claim that homosexuality and homosexual marriage is unnatural.”


Once again this seems like an opinion. No sources. This seems like as stigmatization because once again, this is basically the same as your previous argument in which this sentence is quite vague. This sentence means nothing without sources.


“Marriage itself is unnatural. It was created as a way to keep women from straying from their husbands. And when is the last time you saw two sparrows gather all their sparrow friends and dress up and hold a wedding?”


How can you compare the mind functioning and complexity of a Sparrow’s to that of the human mind?


Once again, this sentence is quite vague and seems to be from your point of view.


“Marriage itself is unnatural. How can you say that marriage is unnatural? Because this debate is focused on Christianity, I will talk about to relevance of marriage in Christianity: Marriage is believed to be a gift from god and should be considered as a sacred ceremony.


God’s purpose for marriage is that it will reflect on god’s image in which we will unite with him and the holy trinity through marriage. The second purpose is that the wedded couple will reproduce in the name of god and in the name of humanity.


http://www.crosswalk.com...


http://www.bbc.co.uk...


“And if homosexuality if unnatural, than why have over 1500 species been documented to partake in homosexual acts.”


In the doctrine of Christianity, it said that all creatures were created under the name of God and by God, but not all species were created equal. This includes how that species mind would work. http://biblehub.com...


“And this clearly proves homosexuality is natural as it is documented throughout history.”


Sources please. You stating that animals taking part in homosexuality, does not prove that Homosexuality is natural. Because in Christianity, each species is created by God, but all work differently in life. God intended for humanity to be the most advanced and intelligent of all the species.


“Some young children are taught to throw away their lives in the pursuit of following an invisible magic man in the sky who loves you...”


Once again, without sources, this can only be seen as an opinion.


This is true in some cases related to the matter of indoctrination. But please note that indoctrination is not exclusive to Christianity but many other religions.


It seems somewhat clear that my opponent is an Atheist, so I say this; many people are indoctrinated into atheism, but something else along the same lines (because there is no doctrine). This is usually due to the influences from that person’s parents being atheist or them being in a background with Atheism as a majority. Indoctrination works both ways in terms of Christianity and Atheism. http://randalrauser.com...


“The pope in 2010 went to Africa; the continent most ravaged by AIDS and told them not to use condoms!


In Christianity and especially Catholicism, it is believed that children are gifts and blessings from god (also seen as a privilege). So because of this, the Pope and many Christians would condone the use of condoms, because using any modern birth control would be seen as defiance towards their God and faith.


It is the Western, Eastern, Southern and central areas which has Christianity as its official majority of religion. It is these areas where AIDS is highest in infectivity. http://upload.wikimedia.org... http://upload.wikimedia.org...


http://biblia.com...


I would now like to talk about AIDS in Africa. There is a misconception that AIDs is widely spread in Africa due to sexual transmissions; this is false. Africa is an LEDC but is slowly developing in many sectors such as industrial and medical; this is not enough though. Within this, there are two main problems which are: 1) the fact that in some parts of Africa, over 10% of that area has AIDS/HIV. 2) many countries in Africa don’t have good medical health care and this has caused a great proportion of countries such as Nigeria etc, to develop Immune suppression, but may also from cysts, lesions and haemorrhaging which can factor to blood transfusions, thus spreading the disease even more.


The rest of my opponent’s argument is not exactly relevant to this debate as such.


Because the BOP is somewhat shared, I shall present my opening argument.


I believe that Christianity is not detrimental to the advancement because it has helped developed the concept of “Western Morality” in which Christians to this day, have developed the principles of morality and reasoning (which is why the majority of humans have a conscience based on these principles- Christianity was a big factor in the previous centuries. The bible has taught people throughout the centuries to respect and love their neighbours- basically everybody. This is because everyone was created by God and that he intended for peace.


My next point is that Christianity majorly responsible for the development of the Western democratically government. 1) Christianity has taught people of that faith to obey to authority (Romans 13). This was commanded by God, so... obviously a Christian would follow this. With this, we are encouraged to live to help respect/honour and be obedient to the laws of that democratically civilization. I would now like to talk about America’s constitutional government. This government has revolutionised America positively (imagine America without a government.). Around 90% of the people, who signed this constitution, were Orthodox Christian. We can see that America’s constitutional government has many roots which are taken from many of the Biblical doctrines. 1) The constitution is linked to the importance of social order. 2) The rule of law, has been found to trace back to the Old Testament; especially the 10 commandments. 3) The idea of sovereign authority- GOD (In God We Trust) is obviously linked to the Bible. 4) It is believed that the Declaration of Independence is linked to the doctrine that all men were created equally by God.


To conclude my argument, I would like to say that Christianity is somewhat responsible for the development of our civilisations, western morality and our government; democratically run. I would like to pose a question; how would our world be like without the existence of Christianity? Considering that Christianity is responsible for the development of western governments, law and morality. I now ask you, how could Christianity have ever been harmful to the advancement of our society?


To conclude, there have been no viable arguments from my opponent (mostly due to there being no sources). I have fulfilled part of my BOP by providing arguments with source which can be seen as viable sources. I had / and took the advantage of being able to refute and rebut some your opening argument.


I will extend my argument and add to in the next round. I cannot list my sources because I have reached the character limit.



Debate Round No. 2
LepreKaunz

Pro

My laptop is broke so I have to write this from my kindle fire and my writing may not be as exquisite. Also my kindle has no way to make paragraphs.
Your argument was sound and well written, but several of your statements left the door open for counter arguments.
You claim that Christianity has given us many of our most fundamental laws, but that simply doesn't stand to scrutiny. The bible tells you to be kind to others and of course not to kill, but many passages in the bible tell you to kill others. "Should you see a man work on the Sabbath he shall be put to death." -Deuteronomy. The interesting statement, "Kill anyone with a different religion," to is found in the same boo as well as, "If you come upon a city that worships a false god, kill all of the inhabitants..... even the livestock." And this seems like a statement that is quite detrimental to any society anywhere.

My next point is that Christianity majorly responsible for the development of the Western democratically government.

How is this so if there is only one omnipotent God who does not take the considerations from others in his decisions? Christian children are taught to follow the rule of one authority figure regardless of consequences.

3) The idea of sovereign authority- GOD (In God We Trust) is obviously linked to the Bible.

The overused idea that the founding fathers had such an affinity with God they put him in the motto on our money. But from 1789, the establishment of the Constitutional United States and it's currency to the 1950's our currency said, "mind your business". I do recall hearing why this was placed there but can't remember why, but I do remember it was suggested Benjamin Franklin. David D. Eisenhower (it was his real name but he switched the middle and first names) placed "In God We Trust" along with his "One nation, Under God..." on our money and the pledge of allegiance, and only got it approved by 7 congressional votes.
The founding fathers never openly claimed that Christianity was inherently good. Thomas Jefferson said, "Christianity never was part of the common law"," in a letter to the Virginia Baptists in 1808. Many Founding Fathers were in fact Diest, a sect of Christianity that scorns organized religion, churches, and religious laws.. This group includes George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock, as well as many others.

I note that Christianity of course has Sins, which apparently God does not want you to do, but why? What makes a sin and why is it bad? Is it perhaps that it defies the authority of the narcissistic authoritarian regimes that are given right by Christian ity and by extension, God? Or that God is the Narcissistic Authoritarian who likes other narcissistic authoritarians who like himself, would destroy the lives of the innocent to have their way? God is denoted as a man. Why? Does it give people in religious power the ability to keep women in check and strengthen their own grip on power?

"Some young children are taught to throw away their lives in the pursuit of following an invisible magic man in the sky who loves you..."

"Once again, without sources, this can only be seen as an opinion.

This is true in some cases related to the matter of indoctrination. But please note that indoctrination is not exclusive to Christianity but many other religions."

Then watch the documentary on Netflix called JesusCamp I believe it is. It's scary. To a logically thinking person it is.

I got around to this a bit late so I'm posting it last minute but I look forward to the next round. May the most thought provoking win.
NiamC

Con


Ok, let’s begin this round with rebuttals.


“The bible tells you to be kind to others and of course not to kill, but many passages in the bible, tell you to kill others.


Ok, I can see where you are going with this; in you are basically saying that the bible says that the lord has imperatively commanded that we should not kill unlawfully. But to counter your arguments, I say that the Bible, Torah etc, does permit the action of justified killing.


Justified killing


The Bible does allow justified killing in which these are followed mainly through the 10 commandments. A great majority of the Western world was and still is Christian. The bible and Torah does distinguish the difference between the shedding of innocent blood, and the capital punishments endorsed under the wish of God in which Christians or Hebrews etc, were commanded by God to punish those who have sinned against the name of God e.g. Idolatry, blasphemy, theft, lying etc.


http://en.wikipedia.org...


http://www.biblegateway.com...


You say that this seems detrimental to society, but you are forgetting that throughout the centuries to the peak of the 14th century, these commands were becoming decreasingly followed. Also, what you have said does not actually show why or how this was detrimental/ harmful to the advancement of our society and how it would be harmful to the advancement of our society, given the fact that more and more people are opting away from Christianity or even any religion.


“How is this so if there is only one omnipotent God who does not take the considerations from others in his decisions? Christian children are taught to follow the rule of one authority figure regardless of consequences.


This is a basic fundamental of Christianity in which God is seen as omnipotent, omnibenevolent and many other words with “Omni”.


http://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org...


http://www.biblegateway.com...


http://www.biblegateway.com...


God is seen as and is recognised by Christians to omniscient (all-knowing). To believe otherwise, would be seen as questioning God’s power and capabilities. It would make sense for the majority in the Western world (who were Christianity) to follow this commandments and doctrines of the Bible. Also, you have not actually explained how this would be seen as harmful to a society or the advancement of our society.


“The overused idea that the founding fathers had such an affinity with God they put him in the motto on our money........ This group includes George Washington, Thomas Jefferson, John Hancock, as well as many others.”


Sorry for not including the entire quote (unnecessary characters...) I understand what you are trying to say about this but this seems irrelevant now in which you have not actually said why any other this would be detrimental to any society or the advancement of our society.


“Then watch the documentary on Netflix called JesusCamp I believe it is. It's scary. To a logically thinking person it is.


Ok, but please note again that this is not exclusive to Christianity. In which it is common to many religions, and may even be in some cases of Atheism. To conclude this does not show why this is harmful to a society, but in this case, indoctrination in this method is a great minority. P.s. I don’t think that I would want to go to JesusCamp.


Conclusion


I have successfully refuted my opponent’s points in which I have rebutted them etc. My opponent has not fulfilled his share of the BOP. I extend my arguments from the last round (which were not successfully refuted by my opponent) meaning that I have fulfilled my share of the BOP.


Thank you for this debate, I have enjoyed it very much.


VOTE CON!


Debate Round No. 3
LepreKaunz

Pro

LepreKaunz forfeited this round.
NiamC

Con

Vote Con... please.
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by NiamC 2 years ago
NiamC
I realise that there is still another round....
Posted by NiamC 2 years ago
NiamC
Ok
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Geogeer 2 years ago
Geogeer
LepreKaunzNiamCTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF by Pro and just better arguments by Con.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
LepreKaunzNiamCTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 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:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture