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

Religion causes too much violence and is not needed in society.

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  
Debate Round Forfeited
MasterManav has forfeited round #3.
Our system has not yet updated this debate. Please check back in a few minutes for more options.
Time Remaining
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/27/2016 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Debating Period
Viewed: 488 times Debate No: 97398
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)




In 1095, Pope Urban II said that God had come to him, and said that the Bible had a mistake and that it was okay to kill, just not to kill other Christians. Whereas the Bible said that killing anyone was wrong. "Whatsoever ye do unto the least of these, my brethren, ye do it unto Me." This means that it is God"s place to judge others not ours, for him to decide whether or not to use violence. Sometimes they refer to texts, such as the Old Testament or Bible, where their God has killed many for defense of the religion and its people, but also they do not mention how it also states that only God has the power to do this; as I quoted earlier. They use some laws to back themselves up, change some laws and cover up some laws.

Multiple "religious" leaders around the world use this to convince young men to commit crimes or help build armies. They use religion as an excuse to go and kill. For example, "Islamic Terrorists" These are not "islamic" people, They are not religious, they are terrorists and murderers. However they can convince, many lost, or vulnerable young people to fight for them, in the name of "Religion". This religious excuse is all some people need to drop everything and take up arms, or to leave their job and join a terrorist group. If we had no religion in society, terrorist leaders, or dictators wouldn't be able to justify their wrong acts, and there would be much less tension between different religions.

For the arguments above,
I am proud to propose.


I accept your argument thusly:
Religion has been around for somewhere in the ballpark of 40,000 years, whereas terrorism is really understood by scholars to have started around the 1st century with Jewish extremists attempting to rebel against Roman rule and control. Granted the idea of terrorism, to attack or hurt someone to cause panic or terror, may have existed longer, it is safe to say that religion has been around much longer.

The first religious evidence we find is even in Neanderthals' burials and rudimentary grave markers. From there we see sculptures of animals, and humans crossed with animals, thought by scholars to have been idols representing deities. No such thought of terrorism would have existed.

After the Sicarii (Jewish extremists) in 6 CE, the next conclusive example of religious terrorism is in the 11th century with Hassan-i Sabbah and Shia Muslims. So if religion is indeed the cause of terrorism and such violence, why is it that it really only started appearing recently? At least recent compared to the roughly 40,000 years of religions without.

A better claim may state something like this: There exist certain evil humans, past, present, and future, that use different values and ideas to move a crowd or population to violence and acts of terrorism. These values and ideas range from cultural, as we can see in many African tribes in history, to political, as we see in revolutionary France, to religious, as we see in the Irish Republican Africa.

For the arguments and the facts within,
I am proud to counter your proposal.
Debate Round No. 1


Although terrorism is recent. It would still better without it in society. Without people dedicating and wasting there lives, dedicating them selves to a non-existing entity. Humanity cannot progress if we keep these religious constraints. For example, in Islamic culture, women are generally deemed to be lesser beings than men, they are forced to wear hijab's and bur qua's. What is wrong about this? Even though in modern society women have almost received the equality they deserve, and men are starting to see women on the same level. Many arabic women, who are viewed as equals, still wear their hijabs. This is still a symbol of their apparent inferiority. Without religion they would not longer wear these, and would not still submit themselves or accept everything they are told they can't be.


While your argument holds mostly grammatical errors and opinions, it also seems to hold a certain prejudice against religion, specifically Islamic religion. But onto my argument.

You claim that "multiple 'religious' leaders around the world" use religion as a justification for violence, yet your examples include only Islamic people and culture. In the scientific community, that is called sample bias. You are looking at a small sample and applying your observations to the entire population. There are many arguments out there for and against the Islamic religion, but I was under the impression your "argument" concerned religion as a whole.
My mistake.

Across history, there are examples of religions bringing peace and helping people come together under a moral purpose. Sikhism is one religion based completely around peace. I would also ague that Christianity is based around peace and brotherly love, primarily concerning the New Testament, but that, just like Islam, certain evil individuals fool people into believing in their causes.

Allow yourself to open your eyes beyond your crude examples that only incriminate Islamic culture.
Debate Round No. 2
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 3
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
This debate has 2 more rounds before the voting begins. If you want to receive email updates for this debate, click the Add to My Favorites link at the top of the page.