The Instigator
qopel
Con (against)
Tied
20 Points
The Contender
kingsjester
Pro (for)
Tied
20 Points

Is it wrong for atheists to try and 'convert' theists?

Do you like this debate?NoYes-6
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 10 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/25/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,109 times Debate No: 30701
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (33)
Votes (10)

 

qopel

Con

Atheism is a NON-BELIEF. It is the default position. It is the null hypotheses. People who believe things without evidence, do not help advance science. Science is mankind's only hope of long term survival. If Atheists continue to stay quiet and tolerate the nonsense brought about by faith, mankind will be doomed. It is imperative for the survival of the human race that Atheists eradicate the ignorance of evolution and science.

Go ahead, challenge this and look foolish.
kingsjester

Pro

According to merriam-webster dictionary, the definition of convert is to bring over from one belief to another. Since you have agreed that atheism is a non-belief, yes it is wrong for atheist to convert people to atheism because it is impossible and ignorant. So yes, it is wrong for atheists to try and convert theists.
http://www.merriam-webster.com...
Debate Round No. 1
33 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
@BennyW: Since I know you won't bother to seek knowledge that will contradict your beliefs, let me tell you this: "everything happened by chance through mutation" is ridiculous. I think you're trying to explain what evolution is. You don't "look at the universe" to see evolution. You look at biology, geology and chemistry. Evolution is not "chance". Look up "natural selection" and you will see that it's not chance.
Where were you during science class? Sleeping? Once again, you proved to me how religion can poison a mind. It's people like you that make me an anti-theist. People like you who not only ignore science, but go around preaching it the wrong way like a disease. You are not helping mankind by doing that. I bet you go to the doctor when you get sick. That's because SCIENCE has the answers to cure you, not a phony God. You know that much or else you'd stay home a pray yourself to a "cure".

Please stop your nonsense and ask yourself if you really care about what you believe as being the truth. If no, keep believing your fairy tales. If yes, go educate yourself about science. It makes sense once you get the real concepts of it, not the nonsense creationists are teaching you.
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
@BennyW Let me try to explain this to you. You don't need to know anything about science or religion to be an Atheist. You don't have to accept the Big Bang or Evolution. You don't have to have any faith. The only thing it takes to be an Atheist is to not believe there is a God.

Your little nonsense about "everything happened by chance through mutation", is just that; nonsense.
If you really acre about what science has to say about the beginning of the Universe, you can raed a book, go to a planetarium, take a college class or ask an expert on astrophysics. Don't make yourself look ignorant with such a statement.
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
Yeah, yeah, the old "It takes Faith to be an Atheist" nonsense. I heard it a million times. That doesn't make it true.
Since Atheism is the default position. It doesn't take any faith to be one.
Posted by BennyW 4 years ago
BennyW
i can't look at the universe and think that everything happened by chance through mutation. If you believe that you just have a lot of faith, I must not have enough faith to be an atheist.
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
Hours? Don't be an a ss.
Posted by TrasguTravieso 4 years ago
TrasguTravieso
If atheists allow people to continue believing in various religions as they have throughout the thousands of years of human history we are likely to perish in a matter of hours. We'd be doomed I tell you. DOOMED!
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
I'd like to ask Penn: If I tackled you because I though an imaginary truck was about to hit you, and you smashed your head on the ground because of it, would you be happy of my "good intentions"?
Posted by qopel 4 years ago
qopel
I believe people have a right to religion. I also believe that people should care about what they believe as being true. Faith is the excuse to believe something without evidence. That's not a very good way to make decisions.
Posted by BennyW 4 years ago
BennyW
The only atheist who would not be hypocritical in trying to convert others would be Penn Jillett and the following video is why, I have never heard any other atheist say anything like this.
Posted by makhdoom5 4 years ago
makhdoom5
its matter of win or loss. no one try to help each other. or share knowledge.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Chicken 4 years ago
Chicken
qopelkingsjesterTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: 1 Round debate, sources and conduct to pro for obvious reasons, arguments tied.
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
qopelkingsjesterTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Neither side was tremendous, but Pro didn't really seem to challenge Con's argument.
Vote Placed by Smithereens 4 years ago
Smithereens
qopelkingsjesterTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Quality of this debate goes into the negatives, however, this still may need an RDF, Con argued that Atheism is non-belief, however, Pro was very smart and turned it into a definition backing it with a source. That was not in the spirit of the debate as the word was an argument not a point for contention of a definition in a single round debate. I give 2 points to Con for not exactly being convincing, but he deserves more than a single point, so its 2.
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 4 years ago
1Historygenius
qopelkingsjesterTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I agree with Johnlubba's RFD.
Vote Placed by likespeace 4 years ago
likespeace
qopelkingsjesterTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: I will second philochristos' detailed RFD.
Vote Placed by proglib 4 years ago
proglib
qopelkingsjesterTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering BigSky's vote bomb. [Philo gave a very good RFD that I will borrow from. Conduct would have gone to Pro due to Con's seemingly arrogant challenge at the end, however I just noticed Pro calls atheists ignorant. Though arguments are brief, I give edge to Con because if reversed the Resolution, many theists would agree for similar reasons. If one thinks that a belief system is harming the world, it is not only NOT wrong to try to convert people away from it, it is one's duty (all things being equal.)]
Vote Placed by BigSky 4 years ago
BigSky
qopelkingsjesterTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Qopel loses conduct for being rude, neither had poor spelling or grammar, the debate was so short that neither argument was very convincing. pro had the only source.
Vote Placed by johnlubba 4 years ago
johnlubba
qopelkingsjesterTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: I agree with Pro, and his definiton of conversion from websters, Conversion encounters going from one belief to another, Sine Con Claim's atheisim is Non Belief then their is nothing to convert to.....Also Con loses points for conduct for creating a debate so short and also being rude. And also Pro provides a source and Con doesn't so source points also to Pro.
Vote Placed by TheSaint 4 years ago
TheSaint
qopelkingsjesterTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con gets argument since he actually made an argument. He is fairly rude in his intro so this counters pro's loss of point for conduct around semantics. But, overall simply attacking the word "convert" does not constitute an argument. Con should win.
Vote Placed by philochristos 4 years ago
philochristos
qopelkingsjesterTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's argument seemed to be that it's not wrong for atheists to try to convert theists because theism is false and will lead to doom. Pro ignored that argument and made an argument of his own. His argument was that since atheism is a "non-belief," and the dictionary defines "converting" as bringing somebody from one belief to another, that it's impossible to convert a theist to atheism. It doesn't seem to follow, though, that it's wrong for atheists to try to convert theists, so I gave arguments to Con. I gave conduct to Pro because of Con's hostile attitude and insinuation that anybody who challenges his point of view is foolish.