The Instigator
TheHitchslap
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points
The Contender
TULIP
Pro (for)
Losing
20 Points

Religion is a force for Good!

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 11 votes the winner is...
TheHitchslap
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/10/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,912 times Debate No: 34651
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (6)
Votes (11)

 

TheHitchslap

Con

Standard COC applies for DDO (Code of Conduct)

Opponent states her case in round 1 for why she thinks religion is a force of good in the world, and says goodbye only in the fourth round. I conclude in the fourth round (because I stated the rules here)

Let's get ready to rumble!
TULIP

Pro

Most people involved in "religion" Christianity more directly are usually there to help others, offer their time to lend an ear and what have you.. It's good to have because of the faith in Christ and the promise of eternal life ... But one can just come to know God without knowing their sinfulness and knowing where tey stand under Gods eyes.. Totally depraved and sinful deserving of nothing but condemnation (speaking 100% to myself too)..

In all basic, Christianity is good because we have assurance as to where were going and have the privileged obligation to preach to the world the Gospel.. Being there and caring.. I truly believe if the world were Christians not just by name but life the world would be a way better place because people would know God, be reverential to Him and worship Him for who He is.. And be thankful for the saved life! :)

Do you think that the Christianity/ religion is bad or not beneficial for the world? If so, why?
Debate Round No. 1
TheHitchslap

Con

Thank you and good luck to my opponent

My Opponents Apologies She Must Make:
To the aborigonal peoples, who were conquored and enslaved due to Christianity in the Americas.
To the African-Americans in the Americas, who Christianity justified to gain more followers into the faith.
To every single sexually assaulted little boy due to the sexual repression preists are subjected too.
To the silence the Jews endured during the holocaust by christians, and their killing by a christian (Hitler) the only Nazi ever excommunicated would be Josef Gobbels .. for marrying a protestant.
The Crusades
The Spanish Inquisition
The Rwandan Genocide
The unjust persecution of Galalaeo Galili and Jan Hus
And the discrimination women faced (and still face today) due to christianity
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Notice in there there is no apology to atheists for killing them off? No apology to homosexuals and their discrimination faced over centuries? Seems disingenuous still.

Counters:
"Christianity is good because we have assurance as to where were going and have the privileged obligation to preach to the world the Gospel"

The gospel is not always good, in fact it claims that anyone waering multiple fabrics is going to hell, that a woman who is raped must marry her rapist and the rapist must proceed to pay her father for damages, that not only does God have his way with you on earth, but even worse after death where the real fun beings; where you get to praise the Furher in a North Korean like fashion. But as Hitchens put's it, at least in North Korea you can die! That two unknowing victims of Satan (Adam and Eve) who lacked knowledge to enable themselves culpable to self-responsibility were literally punished by God when he fully well knew they would eaat the fruit due to their ignorance. Seems quite harsh, and downright cruel.

" Most people involved in "religion" Christianity more directly are usually there to help others, offer their time to lend an ear and what have you.. It's good to have because of the faith in Christ and the promise of eternal life"

I personally fail to see the good in this, again North Korea like praise after death? Furthermore, lets take one issue shall we? And lets examine how well the Chruch has done on this issue. Homosexuality and the "reform and rehabilitate" camps they have imposed to turning gay people "straight". A large body of psychologists actually agree these camps do far more psychological harm than good to the homosexuality community. And it's not just homosexuality, to be a christian, you have to believe that yes Aids is bad, but condoms are far more dangerous, and that although teenage pregnancy outside wedlock is a sin, that same teen who takes birthcontrol pills is a murderer for an act she may not have wanted to committ, or for a genuine mistake that this supposed "creator" who gave life enabled her to do in the first place! Absurd? I think so! Christianity is literally it's own worse enemy!

Sources: http://en.wikipedia.org...
"God is Not Great: How Religion Poisons Everything"- Christopher Hitchens

" I truly believe if the world were Christians not just by name but life the world would be a way better place because people would know God, be reverential to Him and worship Him for who He is.. And be thankful for the saved life! :)"

See appologies because history seems to have a major disagreement with you there ma'am!


Even worse?
It calls for a major bloody genocide, that anyone who does not agree with the beliefs of them is going to an eternal area of pain and torment when Christ returns. The idea of "God" was mean't to be coercive via fear-mongering, even Pascals Wager rests on the assumption of believeing in God out of fear of hell and that believeing in him is a "lesser evil". It rids people of their personal responsibility of their rapes, murders, etc... due to their repenting. But this does not unrape or unmurder someone, and by their own logic, a person who has never harmed someone like Christopher Hitchens versus someone like Jeffrey Dhamer is going to heaven, despite the disgusting acts he committed throughout his lifetime.

I think we can all agree that Religion is not a force of good in the world today =)

Thank you!
TULIP

Pro

Thank you for all of your historical examples.

As it appears from con, he wants me to apologize for the cruel, unnecessary and absurd historical events that took place and still may be taking place today. I'm not going to apologize for people being fakers/phonies of their beliefs. A REAL regenerated (born again) Christian wouldn't kill millions of Jews for foolish reasons, hold people as slaves or hostages Because they think they're better than the other, cause war with whomever because of differences or whatever the reasons were. These things are not signs of a true Christian. These are signs of people claiming to be Christian ONLY by name and not by life. So what I'm sorry for, is that people from past events have caused great confusion to what true Christianity truly is.. This along with other things such as con mentioned about priests give true Christians a bad name and this is why people view us wrongly all because of those who've shown wrongly. If a person says they're Christian and does exactly what the world does then that should tell anybody they're not really Christian at all but fakes. So I'm sorry for that con. I'm sorry that history and today's events cause you and many others to drift away from God because of fakers.

Con mentioned that Adam and Eve were ignorant in the beginning, but if that is true then why did they decide to eat the fruit then? It says, the fruit was pleasant to the eyes and it looked good to eat (paraphrased).. So if the fruit looked good to the eyes and good enough to eat, but God warned them not to eat it then why did they decide to eat it then?.. It wasn't because they were ignorant, no they knew what they were doing.. It was because they chose to disobey on their own FREE WILL .. This had nothing to do with God.. Yes, He knew that they were going to do that, but if He's so cruel, then why didn't He just kill them on the spot for disobeying Him and decided to not allow the world to populate?? He showed them Grace.. Grace enough to live, work, be strengthened, have children, and provided for them.. How's that cruel?? They became sinful but because of themselves.. And were sinful because of us.. Con mentions about people believing in God outta fear of hell.. I reassure you, that I do not fear hell because I know it's what I deserve.. It had nothing to do with hell of why I believe in Him.. There's a preacher that once said, "if you haven't had a relationship with sin then you haven't had a relationship with God." ~Paul Washer

And what that basically means is, is if a person truly understands there sin and know where they stand under Gods eyes and know just what they deserve (hell=Gods full wrath) then they'll be able to have a true relationship with God..

Con, fear to you is being afraid and scared but fear to me is a reverential honoring fear.. It's knowing understanding who I am and what I deserve.. But because I understand and know this that is why I do not fear "be afraid or scared" of hell because I understand that if God sees me as hell bound then I know it's what I deserve.. If Believing in God is based off of fear why believe in God then because that's just a waste of time.. What is there to fear if there's Grace, Mercy, Forgiveness and Love given freely to those who are TRULY His?? And for those hell-preachers who forget to mention the Cross of Christ are going to have to answer to God for their harshness to the world. I do hope this answers your concerns and questions.

Best wishes on my opponents response. :)
God bless.
Debate Round No. 2
TheHitchslap

Con

Thank you to my opponent for her arguments.

Counters:

Bad Christians are not "real" Christians
- The very spokesperson for the Crusades was the top expert on Christainty (Pope Urban II) who directed the Franks to slaughter thousands of Muslims to try and reclaim Jereuslem. He is as real as it gets and is in fact probably more of an expert on Christianity than my opoonent is.
- The slaughter of Anti-semetism is recently stopped. However, it has gone back farther since the time of Martin Luther. In fact Martin Luther himself on The Jews (his own book) he argues that synogogues and Jewish rites should be outlawed. The Russians (Orthodox Christians) also had several Pogroms up until the USSR takes place, and finally even today under Stephen Harpers leadership (Prime Minister of Canada) for funding anti-gay organizations which were openly christian as well operating in Uganda. Clearly Christianity has had a long history of hatred for minorities, and it is the real christians, consider the following biggoted passages in the Bible: John 5:16, 7:1, and 7:13, all of which hate on Jews, and the infamous story of Sodom and Gomorrah which clearly was an attack on homosexuality.
-It appears as though those "bad christians" my opponent claims follow the bible more closely than my opponent.
-Anti-semitism only stopped in 1964 as an offical doctrine by Christians ..

Adam and Eve Were Innocent
- My opponent ignores one major factor in her contention that they were responsbile by their actions; the representitive of Satan as a serpant! They were tricked and it seems harsh for someone who should have had the foresight to know and see this, to do nothing and then proceed to punish them seems immoral at the best. Outright evil IMO. And why didn't he kill them?
-Some things are worse than death, in fact God clearly wants people to suffer next in his story of Cain and Abel (the first murder) and infact is furthered by this genocidal maniac when the bible claims that when Jesus returns, all of the worshipors are saved, while the rest go to hell. And in fact in Noah's story, God kills off everyone due to them disobeying him. He does several times, kill more men than the devil himself!

Sin is Good
-Uhh ... hell is the devils domain...NOT Gods .... clearly hell is the abandonment of God, and if that is the case, yes if you "sin" you cannot have a relationshop with God. Not the other way around, that's just question begging. And while you yourself may not fear hell, does not mean every single other christian does not!

Fear
- Well, lets take my opponents arguments and make them logically valid. If God is mercyful and nice, why even have a hell in the first place? Seems unnecessary ... oh wait ... because God ISN'T like that!

Dropped Arguments:
-Opponent never responds to the fact that Heaven cllosely resembles North Korea, a tyrannical, horrific state known for it's human rights violations
-Never denies any homophobic tendancies, and the outright contradictions with the sciences, and damages the Chruch continues even today

In fact, the chruch is outright hypocritical, even owning a porn production company (source: http://www.foxnews.com...)


Clearly if a God did exist, and religion took over the world, the world would be a much worse place, not a better one!


Over to my opponent! :)
TULIP

Pro

Thank you Con for your rebuttals and points!

Con points out that Muslims were killed by the pope and what not and that Martin Luther said things about te Jews in his book and everything else, but I ask you Con would a true person of some belief do the opposite of their beliefs? In your case, you don't hold to a belief in God would you agree that it would be outrageously weird to say something like God is the One true God knowing that you yourself are not a believer and aren't sure that this to be true? So why would a person who says they're Christian kill someone/s over differences? That's not true identity of a Christian. It's in fact falsely accurate that those people claimed to be who they claimed to be. It's easy to say I'm so and so, but to do setting completely different is hypocritical. Wouldn't you agree with that??

If Adam and Eve were innocent that means every person that kills, hates, cheates, lies, rapes, steals, covets, lusts, commits adultery, etc... Is innocent too then?? Is that what your saying?? Cause if I'm not mistaken, people go to jail, prison or die for their wrong doings everyday. Yes? So if they're innocent that means that they are ignorant to knowing right from wrong and so were Adam and Eve?? Is that what your telling me?? I thought people chose to do what they do?? Decide to obey the laws or disobey them?? That's what happened with Adam and Eve God gave them the free will to decide if they would obey Him or not.. They're/ w'ere not robots.. We have that free will to decide whether to do right or wrong.. So no, Adam and Eve were not innocent because they knew what they were doing was wrong if not why did they question it at first?? Don't we all do that today when were faced with temptations or decisions in our lives especially if it's a bad situation?? Question to do the situation or not?? (Tht can be anything btw)..

No, the devil doesn't hve that much power to domain hell buddy.. God created hell.. Hell is nothing but Gods full wrath! That's it! Just a place without God except His wrath in fullness! And I'm sorry, but going to hell isn't enough to fear it's being without God that would scare me more than anything! If I or anyone were to go to hell, it's because it'd be what we deserve! (Sorry if you don't agree or believe this).

If God is so mean, unfair, unkind and unmerciful why is it that there are Christians today who are free and going to be with Him?? We ALL should be going to hell, but God made a way for us not to hav to go to hell and that's through faith in Christ alone!!

To you heaven/ North Korea concern not exactly sure what your point in that was I guess is why I didn't really take notice to it to be honest with you. And as unfortunate as it is, I have to agree with my opponent that the Church is much corrupted than just the average people, but ones gotta ask why that is?? It's not because God is corrupt, but the people are and are fakers. Fakes leads to chaos! I actually had no idea about the porn thingy that a church started?? That's terrible to know and merely pitifully outrageous! People who claim to be Christian and do this kind of things are far greater worse than the people who know not God (speaking 100% to myself too cause I know I fall short and sin at times too).. Things like tht is what confuses people like my opponent as to what true Christianity is and runs from it..

I want to take a moment and apologize to my opponent for the misleading and fakes who claim to be Christians and do things that only reveal worldiness and gives off a bad mark and bad name to Christianity. Please don't look at all Christians like this "hypocritical" because not all who claim to be Christians are fakes. I know it may be hard to trust a Christian "me" because of all the things you just shared with me in this debate, but I reassure you that not all Christians are like that! Please consider what I'm saying. I am truly sorry for the misconception you've gained from false Christians Con. I relly am sorry :/

I will await my opponents reply :)
Debate Round No. 3
TheHitchslap

Con

Crimes Committed By Religion:
My opponent claims that to be a Christian, one must uphold the "Thou shall not kill" amendment, and because the examples I have shown violate this, that somehow they were not real christians. The problem with this? My opponent drops the folowing completely: That anti-semitism was a doctrine in contradiction of this up until the 1960's. But don't just take my word for it, check out the following:

" Anyone arrogant enough to reject the verdict of the judge or of the priest who represents the LORD your God must be put to death. Such evil must be purged from Israel." (Deuteronomy 17:12)
" You should not let a sorceress live." (Exodus 22:17)
"If a man lies with a male as with a women, both of them shall be put to death for their abominable deed; they have forfeited their lives." (Leviticus 20:13)
" Whoever strikes his father or mother shall be put to death." (Exodus 21:15)
A priest's daughter who loses her honor by committing fornication and thereby dishonors her father also, shall be burned to death. (Leviticus 21:9)
Whoever sacrifices to any god, except the Lord alone, shall be doomed. (Exodus 22:19)
Suppose you hear in one of the towns the LORD your God is giving you that some worthless rabble among you have led their fellow citizens astray by encouraging them to worship foreign gods. In such cases, you must examine the facts carefully. If you find it is true and can prove that such a detestable act has occurred among you, you must attack that town and completely destroy all its inhabitants, as well as all the livestock. Then you must pile all the plunder in the middle of the street and burn it. Put the entire town to the torch as a burnt offering to the LORD your God. That town must remain a ruin forever; it may never be rebuilt. Keep none of the plunder that has been set apart for destruction. Then the LORD will turn from his fierce anger and be merciful to you. He will have compassion on you and make you a great nation, just as he solemnly promised your ancestors. "The LORD your God will be merciful only if you obey him and keep all the commands I am giving you today, doing what is pleasing to him." (Deuteronomy 13:13-19)
But if this charge is true (that she wasn't a virgin on her wedding night), and evidence of the girls virginity is not found, they shall bring the girl to the entrance of her fathers house and there her townsman shall stone her to death, because she committed a crime against Israel by her unchasteness in her father's house. Thus shall you purge the evil from your midst. (Deuteronomy 22:20)

Case and point, they are in fact following the Bible, if so much as one person in a village worships the "wrong" God, they are compelled to kill the whole village! They literally are following the bible.

Adam and Eve:
My opponent commits an abuctum ad absurdum. No I never claimed all criminals are innocent, but rather that only Adam and Eve were. The simply couldn't have had the knowledge to intentionally commit the crime. Espescially when temped by someone like Lucifer, for doing nothing more than giving you and me the ability to critically analyse what we're given. Seems to me logically that satan is more "good" than God in this story as he gives us the ability to think!

Hell:
"If were going to hell it's because it's what we deserve" But this is simply question begging. How do you know you deserve it? Did God write the bible? If not, how can we trust that the people who actually did write it were actually speaking on behalf of God and not for their own delusions? You have no idea, and what you think you should go to hell for and what I think are two completely differing values. If you even so much as think wrongly about God, your off to hell, which ought to be nonsense! It's thoughtcrime!

Why are so many Christians going to be with him? Again, question begging, because neither you nor I can prove God exists or not, but rather if it is good or not. And as I have shown, has exercised a monopoly on knowledge and law, until their crimes against humanity were exposed and now it appears to us with a smiling face, but is this justification to forget their previous greviances? As an atheist, I think not. Not when someone like me years ago would have been put to death for my beliefs!

In conclusion:
I have shown that not only is Religion terrible for the world, but that the people committing those crimes were following the bible, and that if it were true, it would be an aweful world! My opponent drops several of my arguments, and committs several acts of scapegoating upon others. The problem is with a literalist interpretation of the bible, they were not somehow acting against God, but in his wishes in accordance with the bible.

Thank you for the debate, my opponent next round can only post a goodbye of her choosing. I've had fun!

please vote for me :D

Best of luck to all!
Debate Round No. 4
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by fartingsaucer 4 years ago
fartingsaucer
Goodbye Tulip. (It's me Oriole King)
Posted by Sweetapplejuice 4 years ago
Sweetapplejuice
I wish i could vote but because i'm new i can't, but here

Religion is NOT a force for good.

Heck why do you think most war started to begin with? It's because of Religion... It's not a force of good, it's a force of all evil. You can tell from Hitler as a very good example, he massacre so many innocent people just because they are Jewish.
To be good, you don't need a force, it's something that comes from within you, and that's not god or religion. So don't use religion as an excuse to be good! IF your really good you don't need any of that, and can still be good! If your evil, your just plain evil.... -_-
Posted by BennyW 4 years ago
BennyW
my vote was totally not a vb, seriously people stop vote bombing but claiming it to be a counter vb, or use a legitimate reason.
Posted by TheHitchslap 4 years ago
TheHitchslap
what new arguments are you guys referring to? I merely countered my opponents contention that the people who did those things were not acting in accordance to the bible, clearly they did.
Posted by TULIP 4 years ago
TULIP
*sarcasm* -> that's very nice to say -_-
Posted by Bullish 4 years ago
Bullish
"Christianity" is a b*tch to define.
11 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Magic8000 4 years ago
Magic8000
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: S&G to Con. Pro used "your" instead of "you're" in R3 and used "there" instead of "their" in R2. Con pointed out various immoral verses and stories in the bible, Pro only addressed the A+E one. Pro objected the Con's historical examples by claiming they were not "True Christians". While Con didn't point it out, this is a No True Scotsman fallacy. Con did point out many of the leaders in such events were in fact Christian leaders, who would know their theology. Pro was silent on that. Perhaps the main reason why I think Con should win this is on the doctrine of hell. Con pointed out hell is a fear tactic. Pro went off on pascal's wager and how she doesn't believe because of it. But that's not addressing Con's main point. Pro kinda proved Con's case by saying everyone deserves hell. How can that be a force for good? Con asked why would a good god allow hell, Pro replied by asking why Christians freely come to him, again ignoring the main point. For that, arguments go to Con.
Vote Placed by Fictional_Truths1 4 years ago
Fictional_Truths1
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:52 
Reasons for voting decision: Con posted new arguments in the last round and had a couple of grammar mistakes. Other than that he won the debate, even when nullifying the arguments he presented in the last round.
Vote Placed by Subutai 4 years ago
Subutai
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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: Counter BennyW.
Vote Placed by BennyW 4 years ago
BennyW
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made a lot of generalizations and assumptions. Also, it's not fair to bring up new arguments in the final round by bringing up new verses if the opponent can't respond. Asking for an apology? Really?
Vote Placed by gordonjames 4 years ago
gordonjames
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - CON starts the debate claiming PRO needs to apologize to the world. -1 CON Grammar - PRO opening was confusing CON "waering", "cllosely " Arguments - CON speaks of the gospel Then he gives the statement " it claims that anyone waering multiple fabrics is going to hell" - what gospel (first 4 books of the NT) is this in? CON shows a either a complete misunderstanding of the Bible, or a direct misrepresentation. CON states "the fact that Heaven cllosely resembles North Korea" Sources - ?? CON seems to like "God is not so good", and wikipedia.
Vote Placed by NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN 4 years ago
NUMBER_1RED_SOX_FAN
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: I am giving the conduct to Pro for the same reason a previous voter did. It is bad conduct to post new arguments in the last round. Other than that, the debate was fairly even.
Vote Placed by Buddamoose 4 years ago
Buddamoose
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I am awarding conduct to Pro, as I consider it bad conduct to present arguments in the final round, as opposed to solely refuting ones peers arguments. As for the arguments, to state this succinctly, an I agree with Philoscridtos, that the delay to support/presentation of arguments in round 4 is a hingepoint. Pro rebutted cons use of examples of morally atrocious acts commited by Christians throughout history, by saying that it was because they were not following Christianity in those actions. Though untrue, this wasnt refuted until the final round and thus in my eyes, discarded as an argument when judging. Otherwise an excellent debate from both.
Vote Placed by MassiveDump 4 years ago
MassiveDump
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Countering GOP's source point because "links" are not the only basis for a source point. Interpretation of the sources must also come into play. I've tied arguments because Pro did counter everything Con said adequately. Not enough to be considered a win, but enough not to be considered a loss. As always, if I'm wrong, please counter me. I was kidding when I said counter me if I'm wrong. I'm not wrong. And now I'm taking back two points by request. Man, this is a long RFD.
Vote Placed by calculatedr1sk 4 years ago
calculatedr1sk
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Firstly, I agree with philochristos that the resolution was changed to Christianity, and judge based on that, and I agree BoP was shared. Pro had an enormous problem in that SHE DID NOT ADVANCE HER CASE. Instead, her BoP was that religion is a force for GOOD, not that it isn't evil. In round one she made unsubstantiated assertions, and little else for the rest of it. To win, could have used a lot of examples of Christian charity, philosophy, etc... But she didn't. She only defended herself against Con with what was basically the argument "it wasn't us real Christians, it was the fakers!" That argument was thoroughly demolished by Con by using scripture itself to show that some of the horrible acts which Christians have done have Biblical support. Even if he was wrong, the resolution (at least once changed) became "Christianity is a force for good!" rather than "TRUE Christianity is a force for good!", whatever the difference is even supposed to be. Conduct & SG to counter Dump
Vote Placed by GOP 4 years ago
GOP
TheHitchslapTULIPTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: I think everything else was equal, except for reliable sources. It's hard to tell who won in terms of convincing arguments. Pro really did argue that a lot of crimes from "Christian organizations" were by a bunch of fakers. On the other hand, Con pointed out a lot of logical fallacies from Pro. Either way, I saw sources (like links) from Con, and none from Pro.