Life is useless without a religious purpose
Debate Round Forfeited
Muslimdebater has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
|Voting Style:||Open||Point System:||7 Point|
|Updated:||2 months ago||Status:||Debating Period|
|Viewed:||327 times||Debate No:||94124|
Debate Rounds (3)
I'd like to thank my opponent for instigating this debate and hope to have a fruitful and meaningful exchange.
My opponent argues that without a religious purpose that life is useless, I will provide arguements against the resolution and BoP lies with Pro.
the condition that distinguishes organisms from inorganic objects and dead organisms, being manifested by growth through metabolism, reproduction, and the power of adaptation to environment through changes originating internally.
without useful qualities; of no practical good
pertaining to or connected with a monastic or religious order.
an intended or desired result; end; aim; goal.
My opponent argues that a person without a religious purpose only has personal purposes, which result in having only personal selfish purposes, my opponent fails to show how a this is true and furthermore deviates from fulfilling their BoP.
It is clear that many non-religious people have useful qualities, and offer their services to help benefit the advancement of humanity, far from selfish I would say. many non-religious people on a daily basis are helping each other, and I wouldn't call that useless.
The resolution has been negated and Pro has not met his BoP.
But anyways, let's see what I have to proof.
1) life is useless.
The conditions are that a person isn't religious.
I think I did give an explanation of this theory. But I'll explain it a bit further.
A person, doesn't believe in god. And we all know that religion tells a person to serve humanity and others and to believe in life after death. These all things make a person selfless and a person starts caring more about the society than his own self.
Now considering this person doesn't have a religion. This person doesn't have any real motive to serve society. Or to believe in life after death. Thus, this person becomes selfish because according to him, he could die any moment. And he would be gone forever. Now, this makes him live this life to its extremes and many people might argue that he does so to serve society too and its not just for himself.
That person lives for himself. If you ask him 'do you want to die today?' He is obviously going to say 'no'. Because he has to live more. He has more desires he has to fulfill.
That's all for now.
There are many service men and women without a religion that serve society in a number of ways,
Fire fighters who save lives on a daily basis,
Medical nurses and doctors help aid people in discomfort on a daily basis,
Police and army personal who risk their own lives protecting civilians and maintaining peace on a daily basis.
This is just a few examples from many that establish the fact that people who are without a religion can and do indeed serve humanity, and thus proves they have useful qualities which are good and purposeful.
My opponent also argues that belief in an afterlife somehow makes ones life useful and purposeful, as this is only an assertion and contains no actual merit, it can also be dismissed by the examples I have set out above, showing that people with no belief in an afterlife, can and do serve humanity and have useful qualities which are of immense practical good.
The resolution has been negated and Pro has failed to establish their BoP, and has not shown how being religious gives one a useful purpose that serves humanity an advantage over someone with no religion.
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
This debate has 0 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click thelink at the top of the page.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.