The Instigator
kgantchev
Pro (for)
Winning
24 Points
The Contender
dudesdowell
Con (against)
Losing
15 Points

Religion (Creationism/ID) should NOT be taught as science in public schools!

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,681 times Debate No: 4276
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (19)
Votes (13)

 

kgantchev

Pro

First of all, I'd like to thank the debater who takes on the opposite view! I look forward to debating these points.

There are several reasons that Religious establishments should not be allowed to dictate what's being taught in public school science classes (USA specific):

1. It goes against the first amendment of the US constitution.
Legally, the US does not endorse ANY religious establishment. Some people might argue that the US is built on Christian Values. Even if this is true, the US is still ruled by a SECULAR government, thus not endorsing any religion and that was decided at the birth of this nation!

2. Religion does not provide the scientific knowledge to actually falsify any scientific theories.
This is a crucial point: religious books have almost NO scientific teachings in them, if they do, then it's pure accident. Reading the Bible or the Qur'an does not give a person the qualifications or the knowledge to actually challenge scientific ideas. I want to specify that while a scientist may be Christian or Muslim, this point would apply to them if their arguments are based on their theological beliefs and not on their scientific knowledge. Or to make an analogy:
A lawyer (assuming that's his/her only education) is not qualified to do brain surgery, because they have only read law books and they don't have enough expertise to perform medical operations.

In the same manner, basing any arguments on the Bible or the Qur'an in an attempt to counter a scientific argument is utterly pointless. These books hold no scientific value, they only hold theological value, and theology and science are CLEARLY not related.

3. Religion offers no motivation to pursue scientific knowledge.
Religion (Christianity, Islam) suggests that the answers to our lives are already given to us by a higher power (God/Allah), therefore there would not be any reasonable motivation which would make people want to look for any answers to life and our origins.

4. This point is similar to point #2: Religion is not science so it has no business in the scientific field.
No theology should be taught in science class, Creation (and Intellectual Design) should be saved for Theology and Philosophy classes... they're simply not science!
dudesdowell

Con

I agree that religions such as Christianity and Islam should not be taught in schools as a science but science in and of itself is technically a religion because it is considered Atheism.
I would have to say that it is not a question of weather the schools teach religion in a religion class or in a science class because as i stated before science is a religion.
Debate Round No. 1
kgantchev

Pro

Thank you for accepting this debate!
--------
FIRST
--------
"I agree that religions such as Christianity and Islam should not be taught in schools as a science but science in and of itself is technically a religion because it is considered Atheism."

Science is not atheism, because science makes NO claims about God. It doesn't deny God neither does it accept God, so if you're trying to be technically correct then science is agnostic, because it just doesn't know.

Moreover, I'd like to bring forth the definition of a religion (Merriam-webster):
[DEFINITION- religion]
1 a: the state of a religious b (1): the service and worship of God or the supernatural (2): commitment or devotion to religious faith or observance

Even Atheism can't be described as a religion, since it doesn't "worship" a "God or the supernatural". Atheism aside, science fits that definition even less. Religion requires that the person worships a God or the supernatural, science does neither!

[DEFINITION- science]
1: the state of knowing : knowledge as distinguished from ignorance or misunderstanding2 a: a department of systematized knowledge as an object of study b: something (as a sport or technique) that may be studied or learned like systematized knowledge 3 a: knowledge or a system of knowledge covering general truths or the operation of general laws especially as obtained and tested through scientific method b: such knowledge or such a system of knowledge concerned with the physical world and its phenomena : natural science

Please note the difference, science is a SYSTEM of knowledge covering general TRUTHS... concerned with the physical world and its phenomena, it takes no position on the supernatural!

--------
SECOND
--------
"I would have to say that it is not a question of weather the schools teach religion in a religion class or in a science class because as i stated before science is a religion."

First you state that you agree that religion should not be taught as science, then you say that religion is a science, therefore you contradict your own statement that religion should not be taught as a science (which is also a religion according to you). In effect you said religion should not be taught as a religion...

But given the previously provided definition of religion, I would like to point out for the second time that science does not fit that description.

You have already agreed that religion should not be taught as science, so this implies that the only difference in opinion was the definition of science. I think that the definitions provided are sufficient in that matter.
dudesdowell

Con

dudesdowell forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
kgantchev

Pro

Due to my opponent forfeiting I would extend my arguments to this round too.

My opponent didn't provide a strong argument in the first round.

Vote PRO!
dudesdowell

Con

dudesdowell forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
kgantchev

Pro

Due to my opponent forfeiting I would extend my arguments to this round too.

My opponent didn't provide a strong argument in the first round, he didn't even bother posting an argument on the second round!

Vote PRO!
dudesdowell

Con

dudesdowell forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
19 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Ragnar_Rahl 8 years ago
Ragnar_Rahl
Nothing at all should be taught in public schools. Silly. :D
Posted by kgantchev 8 years ago
kgantchev
"Though you speak as if you listen your very words testify otherwise."

Indeed, one often ends up judging himself correctly when faced with his mirror image.
Posted by Amplifier 8 years ago
Amplifier
Kgantchev.

Though you speak as if you listen your very words testify otherwise.
Posted by kgantchev 8 years ago
kgantchev
"I tell you now, He has spoken more words to me today then you have."

A blind man walks into a car, inserts the key in the ignition and drives off! Where is he going?

Cheers
Posted by Amplifier 8 years ago
Amplifier
Kgantchev.
You speak as if my God is distant, living in shelter from me. But you see, He is with me, speaking at all times and presant. Words of truth He speaks to me and I listen. God is not from space is He? Why do you speak as if He lost me, didnt He say "I will look for my lost sheep."

I tell you now, He has spoken more words to me today then you have.
Posted by kgantchev 8 years ago
kgantchev
"I, a seven year old student of the law know better than to speak such rubbish. I am not seven, but even a child who is seven knows more than you."

Your words ring bells which the ears of the blind hear from many miles away. Your lips form shapes which the deaf can read... but when you speak to the seeing and hearing, then your lips don't move, nor does the sound come out of your vocal cords. The muteness of your thoughts carries past the glitter of the wondering eyes and they float away in to the emptiness of eternity.

You have not been able to realize why this happens, you look upon your Lord and beg for answers. But the Lord has given you the power to look within yourself and find the answer which you were seeking, yet you still ask Him! You ask Him because you have lost the ability to look within yourself, although He gave you that ability as a gift for your birth. You have lost it because you didn't exercise it!

Cheers!
Posted by Amplifier 8 years ago
Amplifier
-Quote.
Either one of these shows a certain lack of intelligence, but again, what can be expected of a 7-year-old (as shown in your profile).
-End quote

Though I tell you about your cheap words you still continue to post ignorant messages.

I speak to you as a child for that is what you are, you have no understanding in the slightest about heaven or earth. You seek the truth but how can you listen without ears? You say I am willing to be taught the truth, but you are ignorant to every detail of the truth. I, a seven year old student of the law know better than to speak such rubbish. I am not seven, but even a child who is seven knows more than you.
Posted by kgantchev 8 years ago
kgantchev
"I have understood what you have said, but can it be that you have not understood what I have written? Though you have seen every word of mine to be pointless, you have yourself forgotten each meaning. Though it be profitable for me to explain every detail, you-and yourself have not the ability to listen."

Amplifier,
that's a great way to excuse yourself from explaining your position or your message. As I said, the truth is self-evident, if you tell it to somebody then they should understand it... The ONLY two reasons people would not understand the truth are:
1. You didn't deliver the message correctly.
OR
2. It's not a truth!

I think that it will be profitable for me to understand the truth, but it seems that you and yourself have not the ability to explain it!
CHEERS!
Posted by Amplifier 8 years ago
Amplifier
Hello Kgantchev.

I have understood what you have said, but can it be that you have not understood what I have written? Though you have seen every word of mine to be pointless, you have yourself forgotten each meaning. Though it be profitable for me to explain every detail, you-and yourself have not the ability to listen. Amen.

Amplifier.
Posted by kgantchev 8 years ago
kgantchev
** I have spoken only the truth to you, but only as to a child can understand. Yes, you are that child which I am addressing. **
Maybe you should talk to me like an adult so we can understand each-other better... If you talk to me like you talk to a child then I'll assume that you don't think I'm intelligent enough to understand your ideas. This means one of two things:
1. Your ideas are not very intelligent to begin with.
2. You don't understand your own ideas.
Either one of these shows a certain lack of intelligence, but again, what can be expected of a 7-year-old (as shown in your profile).

** Everthing on a human level you evaluate and resolve, but you cannot with the bible. **
That's why I don't use the Bible :), it can't be intelligently evaluated and resolved... if God gave us reason, but we can't reason with the Bible, then why did God gave us reason and the Bible? He should have picked one! LOL

** When ever you read the bible you have always read half. Every word that you have ever read has been half truth. **
Maybe you should write the other 1/2 of the Bible that I have been missing...

** But I have only spoken to you words of truth. Is it any wonder that you cannot understand what I say? **
Yes, if I can't understand what you're saying it's because you're not really telling the truth, or you don't know how to say it. As I said before, the truth is self-evident, so it shouldn't be that hard for me to understand it, or for you to explain them.

** You correct our words by your physical law, and you still wonder why we speak nonsense? **
See above, the truth is self-evident... and it makes PERFECT SENSE!

** I have addressed you correctly, but even though you do not understand, at least you have heard the truth. **
The truth is self-evident!
13 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Biowza 8 years ago
Biowza
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by Oolon_Colluphid 8 years ago
Oolon_Colluphid
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by debatist 8 years ago
debatist
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by night 8 years ago
night
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by shdwfx 8 years ago
shdwfx
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by 8_belles 8 years ago
8_belles
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by Derek.Gunn 8 years ago
Derek.Gunn
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by SweetBags 8 years ago
SweetBags
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by s0m31john 8 years ago
s0m31john
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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 
Vote Placed by Jamcke 8 years ago
Jamcke
kgantchevdudesdowellTied
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