The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Is religion necessary?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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: 8/21/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,202 times Debate No: 36872
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (0)




I believe that religion shouldn't be part of our society, because according to science we could verify how our galaxies and other parts of the universe were conducted. The big bang theory is one aspect that explains the creation of our world, specifically this theory tells us that the big bang occurred around 13.7 billion years ago and by the way this is the original age of our universe, during this time our galaxy was torrid and compact, also it was extending massively. The big bang theory also explains that our world formed as a singularity, a singularity is a group of areas which are located in the center of the black hole. And since the black hole is a zone of deep gravitating pressure the matter is crammed into bottomless consistence, these zones are considered to be singularities. And as the singularity was extending, it got smaller and hotter until the actual big bang happen.

People used religion to explain how everything worked, but now we are in a sophisticated era were we could explain all creations, but sadly people continue to deny them. Think about it, if we didn't have religion we would've started exploring more; we would've been able to answer all of the scientific questions that people wandered about.


In the name of God.

Con's Topic is Interesting but the Character limit of 2,000 I have will not let me express myself openly.

So I start would start my Argument with the definitions.

Religion: A set of beliefs concerning the cause, nature, and purpose of the universe, especially when considered as the creation of a superhuman agency or agencies, usually involving devotional and ritual observances, and often containing a moral code governing the conduct of human affairs. (or we can say set of Beliefs or if we elaborate a Belief of a person which can lead him to distinguish between right or wrong by following the divine laws of a supernatural being who has authority to do justice. )

Science: (from Latin scientia, meaning "knowledge") is a systematic enterprise that builds and organizes knowledge in the form of testable explanations and predictions about the universe.

The claim of Con seems very narrow & not at all logical..I would rationalize my answer illustrating some examples which can bring forward the need of religion for society and human beings.

1) If hypothetically we eliminate Religion from this earth and see the following example.

Suppose there is a Thief with mighty Power e.g. a corrupt millionaire with Police and Ministers in pocket and 100s of Guards.

What Logical reason can science give him to Not to do wrong? (there is no God, there is no fear of someone who has set the laws of religion) Con will answer.

2) Hitler Killed +6 Million People on if even you catch Him alive How many times you can kill him to give justice to 6 Million? (Concerning Resurrection Day a common belief of Most of Religions)

3) If there is not governing authority whom a person can love and fear whom he shows his goodness then the world is going to be very selfish!

I again state due to restriction of characters I can not write more.. I would ask Con to Answer me these questions and present Burden of Proof.

Good Day!
Debate Round No. 1


negotiator forfeited this round.


Con Forfeited.. I Think He Agrees what I said...

I would like to Extend my Argument along with the following..

Its false that People use religion to explain the science there always have been a visible line between the religion and science... though many religions tried to give reasons to science but those were fake religions which can never hold up with science..

I belive there is a God who is running everything in such a perfect order that even a jot was not placed right everything have been down like a pack of cards...

No Man can do it and Never it can happen by it self..
Debate Round No. 2


negotiator forfeited this round.


Con Fortfied ... Agrument Extended..


I Think He Agrees with what I said though I was not complete yet because of Limited text to 2000 alphabets i was not able to express my self..


God Bless All

Purpose: Well the purpose of my previous, this and up coming debates is never to hurt any personal or private feelings of anyone I believe the purpose always be to learn and seek knowledge and establish Truth & the right facts for the people out there and to make people understand the difference between Rational & Irrational Thoughts.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by LoopsEye 5 years ago
Thanks Bro God Bless you.. I would like to add I am a student of comparative religions if you have any question regarding Christianity or Islam and Hinduism Please do ask me or talk to me you can put up a debate for it also ..

Purpose: Well the purpose of my previous, this and up coming debates is never to hurt any personal or private feelings of anyone I believe the purpose always be to learn and seek knowledge and establish Truth & the right facts for the people out there and to make people understand the difference between Rational & Irrational Thoughts, Truth and Lies .. We have to be politest to truth and very strict to lies!!
Posted by negotiator 5 years ago
I must have to say that I do agree with you. This is actually my first debate. I would like to thank for debating me.
Posted by Dragonfang 5 years ago
Seems like Con is confusing efficent/final cause with material cause.

Here is an example:
You may ask a mountain climber why does he climb mountains, and he can give two different actions that are accurate:
1- "I want to see the view from top, I want to challenge myself, etc...". Which is a Teleological explanation.
2- "Since I consumed food, my body produced energy which my muscles used to start a chain of contractions after neuron signals were sent by the brain through the spinal cord after being stimulated etc..." which is the mechanical explanation.

The crafter is the efficent cause. The purpose is the final cause. The process of crafting is the material cause.
Posted by LoopsEye 5 years ago
nego. 2000 what a person can say in that man? please next time take care i understand u are new here keep it friendly
Posted by Dmot 5 years ago
More characters needed for an argument like this!
Posted by justin.graves 5 years ago
I'd accept, but is says I don't fit the age, rank, or other criteria.
Posted by negotiator 5 years ago
I just signed up just today, I am new here too. I was just looking for a simple debate, but actually it's more complex than i thought it'll be.
Posted by Ruben 5 years ago
Negotiator, is your claim that we don't need religion because it is not true, or because it is not useful? Even if your argument about origins is granted, one could still argue that religion is useful to society.

PS. I get the message "You cannot accept this challenge because you do not match the Instigator's age and/or rank criteria." I'm new here. Can someone help me with this? Where can I find the criteria for this debate? Is there a page with the debate rules somewhere?
Posted by Oromagi 5 years ago
I'd accept the debate, but I don't meet your criterium. I would argue that religion is an indisposable human impulse. Along with art, science, philosophy, religion is a spoke on a wheel with humanity at the hub and the universe of space and time turning about. The tenants of religion change just as science does, but the urge to fill in the unknown with concrete explanations that mostly reflect our own values can't be nullified. I would argue that UFOlogy, trutherism, birtherism, and similar statements of faith in the face of reason are modern evolutions in the religious impulse- some of which may become actual religious movements, the way Scientology incorporates psychology and aliens. Look at your own opening, which began with "I believe" and then stated Big Bang theory as a proven fact. How many times has the Big Bang been observed or repeated in a lab? How do we account for dark matter? The proofs could be eons away, but that doesn't stop you from filling in the gaps with confidence. You couldn't do away with religious impulse, not even in an argument against religion.
No votes have been placed for this debate.