The Instigator
CarterDebatesAlot
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
philochristos
Pro (for)
Winning
23 Points

Is Religion Important?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 7 votes the winner is...
philochristos
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/3/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 877 times Debate No: 43324
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (7)

 

CarterDebatesAlot

Con

Religion is a waste of time and money. First, religions only start when somebody chooses to create it. The creator gets followers with false statements that could never be proved. After this person creates this religion he wastes money on building churches to worship this false organization of a religion. People should focus on this that can potentially be proved such as science and philosophy. People have proved evolution in many ways. Nobody has ever proved a religion because it is strictly impossible unless someone created the religion off facts such as scientology.
philochristos

Pro

While reading Con's opening, it's easy to forget what the topic of the debate is. The topic is not, "Is religion a good thin?," or "Is it worthwhile to join a religion?" or "Could we do without religion?" anything like that. Rather, the resolution is "Is religion important?"

Things can be important for entirely negative reasons. For example, if a meteor were on a collision course with earth, the meteor would be very important, even though we could all do without it.

Con has only argued that religion can't be proved and that it wastes time and money. But it doesn't follow that religion is therefore unimportant. Religion is important for a number of reasons, to wit:

1. Religion is important because it affects how people think and how they live.

2. Religion is important because people spend a lot of time and money on it.

3. Religion is important because it has had an enormous effect on our collective histories, which in turn has had an enormous effect on the way the world is today.

Conclusion

Since it doesn't follow that religion is unimportant from the reasons Con gave, his burden of proof is unmet.

Since I gave three good reasons showing that religion is important, and since I have refuted Con's argument (by showing his premises to be irrelevant), I have carried my burden of proof.


Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by zmikecuber 3 years ago
zmikecuber
CarterDebatesAlotphilochristosTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro responded to Con's arguments and provided his own.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 3 years ago
KingDebater
CarterDebatesAlotphilochristosTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: One-round debates are rarely won by the instigator, and this was no exception. Pro gave three sound reasons why religion is important.
Vote Placed by Iamthejuan 3 years ago
Iamthejuan
CarterDebatesAlotphilochristosTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Cons argument was especially weak for a 1 round debate with a 178 day voting period. Not sure what is going on here, but it seems as if con just wanted to spew his personal misconceptions about human spirituality. Pro also gets conduct for his use of paragraphs and actual premises in his arguments. Nobody used sources, so it is a tie there.
Vote Placed by Sagey 3 years ago
Sagey
CarterDebatesAlotphilochristosTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro picked up on Con's mistake of wording the Title as such, a better title would for Con's sake, "Is Religion Good" which is what Con was arguing against. Or "Is Religion Relevant to The Present", both would have been an easy Con target. Pro thus demonstrated that, especially in a multicultural, society where many faiths and non-faiths exist, where we need to understand others (I'm learning psychology) their religion is certainly important.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
CarterDebatesAlotphilochristosTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con didn't negate the resolution, as was his burden for conceiving of the round. Pro argued it well.
Vote Placed by MassiveDump 3 years ago
MassiveDump
CarterDebatesAlotphilochristosTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: And so, we prove once again that one round debates are never won by the instigator. Con had a semi-specific resolution, but did not completely defend it (as Pro stated, it does not follow). This led to an unfulfilled BoP. Look on the bright side: at least he didn't forfeit.
Vote Placed by GarretKadeDupre 3 years ago
GarretKadeDupre
CarterDebatesAlotphilochristosTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con didn't really defend the resolution at all, but made a bunch of red herrings. Pro pointed this out and argued against the resolution, which Con failed to defend.