The Instigator
Rockylightning
Con (against)
Losing
57 Points
The Contender
CrysisPillar
Pro (for)
Winning
75 Points

Religion is overall beneficial on the human race.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+8
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 25 votes the winner is...
CrysisPillar
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/23/2010 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 8,162 times Debate No: 12119
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (52)
Votes (25)

 

Rockylightning

Con

1. Is illogical
The conception of God that most people around the world have simply cannot exist. First, let me define what most people think of as God: An all-powerful being, who created the universe, who is all-good. Now, you would think that a universe created by such a being would be a wonderful place to live in. Of course, as we all know, this is not the case. Innocent children get raped by pedophiles. Criminal CEO's rob people of billions and get away with it. People in third world countries work their asses off and yet they live horrible lives. If God is both willing and capable of stopping these perversions of justice, then why doesn't he? The answer, of course, is that he doesn't exist.

2. Obstructs science.
Science has proven more to us in the last 10 years than religion has for 3 Millennium. Who stopped Galileo from informing people that the Earth revolved around the Earth? THE CHURCH. Who Killed people who thought of new ideas? THE CHURCH. Who kept all the Greek, Roman, and Latin scientific texts and literature from the common public during the middle ages? THE CHURCH. Not to mention the only period in history the church was in complete power was the worst of all time. Refute this please.

3. Corrupts man
Defined by urban dictionary:
Allah Boom: 1. These two words mark the end of a suicide bomber's life. He or she will scream anything related to their god and detonate their bomb which is attached to their body, sacrificing themselves for religious reasons. It is believed that doing so will reward the bomber with 72 virgins in Heaven. ( Or so it is said )

Right now suicide bombers end their life in hope that they will go to paradise. Also right now, Christians say thanks in hope that they will go to heaven. One evil, the other pointless.

4. Examples
1) God does not cause evil, the Devil does.
OK, this one is perhaps the stupidest one. If you believe the Devil is capable of subverting God's will and causing evil, then you believe that the Devil is as powerful as God, and you shouldn't call yourself a monotheist. Plus, if the Devil can do whatever he wishes despite God's will, then God is not all powerful. Therefore this argument doesn't fly,

2) God is all good, evil comes from man's free choice.
I don't buy this one either. God created everything (according to the religious people). Therefore, he must have created both humans and free will. Now why would he create free will if he knew some men would choose evil? You might say that evil people turn away from God, so he has no responsibility towards them. Ok, fine. But what about the innocent, good people that are harmed by the evil people? Doesnt God care? Of course not, because he doesnt exist.

3) Evil exists in the world for reasons we don't and CAN'T understand. God's reasons are unknowable because we are mere puny humans.
This is probably the best reason, but I still don't buy it. According to this statement, you are supposed to just accept evil because you trust that god has a reason for it. Now, I simply can't accept this. Why would God give us intelligence if we weren't meant to use it? If God simply intended for us to be herded around like sheep, why didn't he make us sheep? The answer, of course, is that God did not make us, because he does not exist.

Please note that I copied these arguments from my previous debate that wasn't completed.
CrysisPillar

Pro

Firstly, I would like to thank Rockylightning for challenging me to this debate. We were actually on Yahoo! Chat about this topic when we decided to debate this topic. Good luck to you, and may the best debater win.

I'd like to start my round by addressing Con's points.

My opponent has stated that the idea of a God all-mighty and all-good is illogical, and brought in that crime still happens in the world.
However, there is reasoning behind this. John 3:16 states, "For God so loved the world be gave his only begotten Son, that all who believe in Him shall not perish, but have everlasting life." The reasoning behind this passage as well as all other teachings of God is that those who really do believe in Him would follow the teachings and try their best not to commit sin. Those who truly believe follow His teachings in the Holy Bible, which include lying, murder, and crime as sins.
Rocky may argue that there are in fact more religious criminals in the U.S. than atheist, but at the same time, a conducted Princeton Survey states that only about 15% of U.S. adults are atheist. That leaves a whopping 85% of adults in the United States as ones who practice a religion, 76% of which are Christian.

Rocky also stated that it obstructs science and that all of these discoveries that were made go against the teachings of the Church. Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth absolutely must be in the center of the universe. In no teachings does it say that God didn't also create the other planets. In fact, there are religious people who believe in God, but they say that He created the Big Bang. In this case, they do believe that He still created the world, but at the same time, they can also believe in evolution in that God just decided that their race was suffering and did not allow them to reproduce. Please address this point for clarification if it does not make any sense to you.
I would also like to bring to mind that this debate is about religion being overall good (or not) for the human race, not whether or not you should believe that any type of God exists.

Urban dictionary is an unreliable source, as well as a site full of offensive language and definitions against certain races, ethnicities, or religions which others randomly throw into the website. This source, and everything quoted from this source, should be heavily disregarded. Give me ONE LEGIT SOURCE that states that Muslims bomb themselves in hopes of going to paradise, and then we can argue that point.
Also, give me a legit reason why giving thanks is a bad thing, or a waste of time. Spending a little time every day to appreciate what you have is a bad habit? If you believe that giving thanks will take you to Heaven, it's bad to want that?

I only have one refutation to clear up all of the examples Rockylightning has listed: we are NOT debating whether or not God exists! We are debating whether or not religion is overall beneficial for the human race or not. Obviously, since you were the one who set up the debate, you more than anyone else should be the one following your own motion. Please follow up your next set of points with relevant information to this debate.

Now, I would like to move onto some of my own points.

1) Religion enriches society.
Religion is a way to differentiate different cultural groups. Without religions, the world would have less diversity and less ways to accept people as who they are. For some people, religion is what pushes them forward to invent new things or even just have a meaning or a motivation to make the best out of life. "Religion helps to regulate our conduct and behavior in society by providing a set of morals and value-system for human existence. True religion protects the human rights of everyone and prevents their violation, ensures social justice, equality and security for all its adherents, ensures a happy, holy, healthy mind in a healthy body, provides for good governance of society and good care of its citizen, and guides our actions in life, putting a check on criminal tendency in human nature. As a science of self-improvement, religion offers a therapeutic and success-oriented lifestyle,a victorious way of life." My source for this is pure reason as well as listed here: http://www.sikhphilosophy.net...
Also keep in mind that this source is a reliable network, unlike Urban Dictionary.

2) Religion enriches individual lives.
In ancient Asia during war and drought, for example, many people turned to Buddhism for peace and comfort. The medieval Renaissance was from the rebirth of Greek and Roman literature, which included their polytheistic religious aspects. Many forms of art included the Virgin Mary, Jesus, and the Greek and Roman gods and goddesses such as Aphrodite and Zeus. It was religion which motivated Michelangelo to paint Adam and God on the roof of the Sistine Chapel, and it was religion that built all the great churches and cathedrals we still see today. Religion is what caused many people to leave Britain to come to the Americas, thus creating our country today. Here is a picture of the Sistine Chapel ceiling, influenced by religion. http://sciencedude.freedomblogging.com...
This painting during the Renaissance is a perfect example of how one artist's life was enriched by religious influence.

I shall expand on my points further and bring in some new ones in the second round. For now, I am turning this debate over to Rockylightning.
Debate Round No. 1
Rockylightning

Con

Note: watch video when cued.

\\\Rocky may argue that there are in fact more religious criminals in the U.S. than atheist, but at the same time, a conducted Princeton Survey states that only about 15% of U.S. adults are atheist. That leaves a whopping 85% of adults in the United States as ones who practice a religion, 76% of which are Christian.///

This helps my side, the fact that there are more religious adults proves that there is a high chance that they are religious.

I do not completely understand the point above this.

\\\Nowhere in the Bible does it say that the Earth absolutely must be in the center of the universe. In no teachings does it say that God didn't also create the other planets.///

The bible never states this, but the Church believed it and they brainwashed people to believing it too. Please note we are not just talking about the bible.

\\\In fact, there are religious people who believe in God, but they say that He created the Big Bang. In this case, they do believe that He still created the world, but at the same time, they can also believe in evolution in that God just decided that their race was suffering and did not allow them to reproduce.///

A classic statement. Saying "God created the counter-argument". What my opponent states is a fool proof system that refutes science by saying "god created science". Why did god create science? Why didn't he just let us live forever in reclining chairs at the beach?

\\\Give me ONE LEGIT SOURCE that states that Muslims bomb themselves in hopes of going to paradise, and then we can argue that point.///

You want proof? See above video:

\\\Also, give me a legit reason why giving thanks is a bad thing, or a waste of time. Spending a little time every day to appreciate what you have is a bad habit? If you believe that giving thanks will take you to Heaven, it's bad to want that?///

OK you want a legit reason? It limits the capabilities of the human mind. Think about it, the wolf has claws, turtle has shell, rabbit has large ears, humans have large brains? Why? To think, to invent, to innovate. Believing in religion and wasting time every day to give thanks is limiting our minds by framing our thinking. Making us think in a straight line, not the explosion of thought supposed to be going on in a human brain. Brain images have proved long ago that people who do not believe in a higher power have much more brain activity than people who do. Not just math going on in their head, but thoughts, imagination, ideas, innovation, not "I wonder if i'm worthy".

Let me say one thing. If things had gone the way the church planned, we wouldn't have landed on the moon. Period.

\\\Religion is a way to differentiate different cultural groups. Without religions, the world would have less diversity and less ways to accept people as who they are.///

Correction: Without religions, the world would have less things to argue about, and less excuses to start wars. Accept people as who they are. That's the biggest lie of this debate. Religions encourage segregation, think about it, how many times have you heard a kid at school call someone a "jew" or "terrorist" because of their religion. Enough Said.

\\\For some people, religion is what pushes them forward to invent new things or even just have a meaning or a motivation to make the best out of life./// Please explain. Last time I checked, religion was the thing that flew planes into the twin towers. Religion was the thing that imprisoned Gallileo, Religion was the thing that burned new thinkers at the stake. Another lie.

\\\Religion helps to regulate our conduct and behavior in society by providing a set of morals and value-system for human existence. True religion protects the human rights of everyone and prevents their violation, ensures social justice, equality and security for all its adherents, ensures a happy, holy, healthy mind in a healthy body, provides for good governance of society and good care of its citizen, and guides our actions in life, putting a check on criminal tendency in human nature. As a science of self-improvement, religion offers a therapeutic and success-oriented lifestyle,a victorious way of life."///

regulates our conduct... please note we are talking about all religions.
Regulates conduct: Burning witches at the stake is good conduct?
Protects human rights: Last time I checked "death by bomb" wasn't a human right.
Ensures a happy, holy, healthy mind in a healthy body: Healthy minds think for themselves, praying is a non-active activity.
guides our actions in life: Guides the airplane into the ground.
success-oriented lifestyle: If success is crashing a plane into the pentagon, then yes.
a victorious way of life: if victory is being proud of the burnt husk of a person on a stake that used to be a "witch" then yes.

\\\In ancient Asia during war and drought, for example, many people turned to Buddhism for peace and comfort.///
Buddhism is not a religion, it is a philosophy, or way of thinking.

\\\The medieval Renaissance was from the rebirth of Greek and Roman literature, which included their polytheistic religious aspects.///

Actually it was the uncovering of what the church had been hiding from them the past few centuries.

\\\It was religion which motivated Michelangelo to paint Adam and God on the roof of the Sistine Chapel, and it was religion that built all the great churches and cathedrals we still see today. Religion is what caused many people to leave Britain to come to the Americas, thus creating our country today.///

While I see your point and it is a good one, religious people were not the only ones to come to America. Others included business men, farmers, criminals, settlers, people seeking a better life, soldiers, mountain men and explorers.

----------------------------------------

Let me share with you today the impact religion has on the world.

Video 1: Suicide Bomber... influenced by religion... people killed, the basic natural right is broken.
Video 2: World Trade Center attacks, influenced by religion.. people killed, basic natural right is broken, it is rumored that the last words of the terrorists on board was (translated) "Let allah stab the American devil through the heart"
Video 3: Brainwashing: Kids are being trained to give their lives for Jesus, it's brainwashing
Video 4: Recruiting Kids For The Army Of God.
Video 5: Training Children For The Army Of gods, rallying them with music
Video 6: Children Pray To "Lord" Bush. Turning the president into a deity.
Video 7: Harry potter, being called an enemy of god, "he should have been put to death"
CrysisPillar

Pro

~" This helps my side, the fact that there are more religious adults proves that there is a high chance that they are religious. I do not completely understand the point above this."
=What I am saying is that the proportionality of criminals being religions to the amount of religious people in this country is not corresponding. In other words, if you were to bring up that there were more religious criminals, I would already have a knock-down. This obstacle for your case is the fact that a very small minority of the U.S. is atheist, therefore saying that most criminals in this country have to be religious. My point of this contention is that religion does not stir up more crime.

~ "The bible never states this, but the Church believed it and they brainwashed people to believing it too. Please note we are not just talking about the bible."
= Note that this kind of teaching was mostly around Galileo's time, not present-day. Can you name any president of the United States who is or was blinded to science? Can you name any important figure that was besides leaders of Churches?

~ "A classic statement. Saying "God created the counter-argument". What my opponent states is a fool proof system that refutes science by saying "god created science".
= If according to Catholicism God created people, and people created science, then technically God created the source of science. If you ask "Why did God create science," then are you asking, "Why did God create the world?"

~ "\\\..ONE LEGIT SOURCE that states that Muslims bomb... in hopes of going to paradise.///
You want proof? See above video:"
= Sure, it's a video of someone bombing themselves. However, how does this prove that a) he did it in a hope of going to paradise and b) he did it for his religion? Bombings can happen anywhere. Look at the Columbine shooting and self-bombing, for example. Were they Muslim? No. Did they do it in hopes of going to paradise? No. Were they doing it for any religion whatsoever? No. Rockylightning has failed to give a reasonable source or evidence that religion causes people to commit extreme suicide in hopes of going to paradise. His point of this is supported with no evidence. With reasoning, if killing yourself took you to paradise, those people practicing that religion would have long since died out.

~ "Think about it, the wolf has claws, turtle has shell, rabbit has large ears, humans have large brains? Why? To think, to invent, to innovate. Believing in religion and wasting time every day to give thanks is limiting our minds by framing our thinking... Brain images have proved long ago that people who do not believe in a higher power have much more brain activity than people who do. If things had gone the way the church planned, we wouldn't have landed on the moon."
= Please give a source, and then I will agree to continue to refute this argument. Also, I already refuted it last round; where do you think the Renaissance came from? It came from the rebirth of Green and Roman texts, some of which were religious. The Renaissance was when art and writing and culture flourished; how can you call it a waste of time? During this time, Italy did think, they did invent, and they did innovate.
There is something called separation of Church and State – If things had gone the way the Church planned, we still would have landed on the moon.

~ "Without religions, the world would have less things to argue about, and less excuses to start wars. Accept people as who they are. That's the biggest lie of this debate. Religions encourage segregation, think about it, how many times have you heard a kid at school call someone a "jew" or "terrorist" because of their religion?"
= Rockylightning, considering that we attend the same school, I'm sure you're not the only one who has heard someone get called a name like that. However, there is still the factor of race. Asians get a stereotype, Caucasians get a stereotype, African Americans get a stereotype – where does it end? If you have a different opinion on politics than others, then you'll still be picked on at school. Maybe you'll still be pushed around as an adult. But in truth, religious differences are another reason why people should try to accept people for who they are.

~ "Please explain. Last time I checked, religion was the thing that flew planes into the twin towers. Religion was the thing that imprisoned Galileo, Religion was the thing that burned new thinkers at the stake."

= Instead of giving me a frightening video of planes crashing into the Twin Towers to try to give an impact on your case, what part of that video shows that this has anything to do with religious meaning? Yes, new thinkers were burned at the stake. I'm here to prove why religion is overall beneficial to the human race – if I can prove to you that there is better than harm with religion to the human race, I win this debate. This point you just bring up about the Inquisition is reasonable. However, those trials ended years ago. See what happened even with our country today? We have a right to religion, or the right to practice no religion at all. It's stated in the Constitution, the framework for government for our very country. You cannot possibly argue against that. I do understand that the motion is based on the human race and not just the U.S., by the way.

~ "[refutations to the advantages listed to the network]"
= As I have previously stated, the world has realized long ago that burning people at a stake is not a way to regulate conduct and belongs nowhere in any civilized society; moving on:
My opponent has never stated any evidence backing up that self-bombing has anything to do with religion. He has just given facts and videos to frighten those who are judging this debate to give his arguments a greater impact, when really they do no harm to my case at all. Rockylightning states that praying is a non-active activity; praying should not take up an excessively huge amount of time out of your life, and although it is not being outside and playing a sport, it does create a peaceful and calm environment for a few minutes at a time: for example, Buddhism.

~ "\\\The medieval Renaissance...///
Actually it was the uncovering of what the church had been hiding from them the past few centuries."
=Again, I need the evidence. Where are your sources? It may have been some of the things that the Church hid from the people for centuries, but the Italians were still living around the ruins of the Roman and Greek Empires where statues and buildings still stood. In fact, what you have stated above actually helps my case – Religion was revealed, and the people flourished; look at that.

~ "Buddhism is not a religion, it is a philosophy, or way of thinking."
= Since you have not stated a definition of "religion," I shall define that now.
According to dictionary.com, religion is "the body of persons adhering to a particular set of beliefs and practices." Buddhism has beliefs in the Buddha, and Buddhism has practices such as praying. Philosophy, on the other hand, is a way of thinking. Buddhism has both, but all in all, is still considered a religion.
Allow me to present another example.
When slavery was popular in the 1700's, many African American slaves looked to Christianity for hope and salvation. We cannot argue that Christianity is not a religion.

~ "While I see your point and it is a good one, religious people were not the only ones to come to America. Others included business men, farmers, criminals, settlers, and people seeking a better life, soldiers, mountain men and explorers."
= That is true. However, 85% of adults in America (18 year olds and up) practice a religion. This study conducted by Princeton includes immigrants and people who came from other countries. There are many countries in the world which practice religions that differ from the majority in our country.

Now for the last round; good luck, Rocky!!!
Debate Round No. 2
Rockylightning

Con

\\\What I am saying is that the proportionality of criminals being religions to the amount of religious people in this country is not corresponding. In other words, if you were to bring up that there were more religious criminals, I would already have a knock-down. This obstacle for your case is the fact that a very small minority of the U.S. is atheist, therefore saying that most criminals in this country have to be religious. My point of this contention is that religion does not stir up more crime.///

You are basing your argument off an assertion, you have no evidence that religion is not related to crime. The areas where high levels of religion are are also high crime levels. Think, the middle east, bad parts of big cities?

\\\Note that this kind of teaching was mostly around Galileo's time, not present-day. Can you name any president of the United States who is or was blinded to science?///

Name one? Ok, Geroge Bush. And if you haven't noticed, a lot of people in the world still believe this, 18% in fact according to a NPR poll.

\\\If according to Catholicism God created people, and people created science, then technically God created the source of science. If you ask "Why did God create science," then are you asking, "Why did God create the world?"///

Why didn't god create us and put us in armchairs on beaches with our favorite foods? Why did he make us deal with all the oil spills, wars, crime etc.

\\\With reasoning, if killing yourself took you to paradise, those people practicing that religion would have long since died out.///

Your reasoning is faulty. It's Killing yourself for your religion that makes you go to paradise, not just committing suicide in general.

\\\The Renaissance was when art and writing and culture flourished; how can you call it a waste of time? During this time, Italy did think, they did invent, and they did innovate.///

Again, your reasoning is faulty, and you are putting words in my mouth. The cause of the renaissance was the uncovering of all texts, not just religious, but also scientific etc. They were uncovering the texts the church hid from them. This point was not refuted.

\\\Rockylightning, considering that we attend the same school, I'm sure you're not the only one who has heard someone get called a name like that. However, there is still the factor of race. Asians get a stereotype, Caucasians get a stereotype, African Americans get a stereotype – where does it end? If you have a different opinion on politics than others, then you'll still be picked on at school. Maybe you'll still be pushed around as an adult. But in truth, religious differences are another reason why people should try to accept people for who they are.///

You do not get this point. Religion creates another thing to tease people about. Enough Said. You have not refuted this point.

\\\Instead of giving me a frightening video of planes crashing into the Twin Towers to try to give an impact on your case, what part of that video shows that this has anything to do with religious meaning?///

... It has been long since proved that the people who hijacked the planes were Islamic extremists. You cannot deny this fact.

\\\Yes, new thinkers were burned at the stake. I'm here to prove why religion is overall beneficial to the human race – if I can prove to you that there is better than harm with religion to the human race, I win this debate.///

The natural right of life will tip the scale much farther than any of your arguments.

\\\However, those trials ended years ago.///

The effects are still echoing on our Earth. It's like saying "The Holocaust happened years ago, therefore it doesn't matter "

\\\We have a right to religion, or the right to practice no religion at all. It's stated in the Constitution, the framework for government for our very country. You cannot possibly argue against that. I do understand that the motion is based on the human race and not just the U.S., by the way.///

Why do you bring up the constitution? First, some countries have no constitution. Second the US was not mentioned in the motion. Third, the human race has no constitution.

\\\. Rockylightning states that praying is a non-active activity; praying should not take up an excessively huge amount of time out of your life, ///

Then why do you state that religion gives you a healthier body? Do you know what your points are?

\\\Again, I need the evidence. Where are your sources? ///
My opponent cannot refute my points, therefore makes my points look invalid by saying I do not have a source. I will state them later because my opponent asked. Most of what I'm saying is common knowledge.

\\\In fact, what you have stated above actually helps my case – Religion was revealed, and the people flourished; look at that.///

You do not get it. The Renaissance was the uncovering of ALL texts. Not just religious. This does not help your points because the Renaissance was where independent thinkers developed, where they moved AWAY from religions. It wasn't a religious awakening, it was an awakening of ALL things. And awakening from the deep sleep of the middle ages where RELIGION governed them.

\\\When slavery was popular in the 1700's, many African American slaves looked to Christianity for hope and salvation. We cannot argue that Christianity is not a religion.///

You point?

\\\That is true. However, 85% of adults in America (18 year olds and up) practice a religion.///

What is your point! If your getting at that "it's popular" then I will refute it. Slavery was popular in the 1700's as you stated before, does that mean it's right?

Now to summarize:

My opponent has failed to refute most of my points effectively and used a red herring fallacy to divert voter's attention away from the fact that she did not refute the point.

My opponent wants sources like a shark wants blood. I will provide them even though my points are for the most part common knowledge.

http://www.etymonline.com...
http://www.cbc.ca...
http://www.cbsnews.com...

My opponent has stated a one source, a blog site. When considering who had more reliable sources, please not this.

Conclusion: The motion is down. All my opponent's points are refuted. I have stated more reliable sources.

For these reasons, Con wins.

Good Day.
CrysisPillar

Pro

Thank you for the debate.

~ "You are basing your argument off an assertion, you have no evidence that religion is not related to crime. The areas where high levels of religion are are also high crime levels. Think, the middle east, bad parts of big cities?"

= Do you have any evidence that states that religion is related to crime, or that areas where high levels of religion are become a place for crime? All cities have their bad parts; you have no proof that these acts were done due to religion. And although what I have just stated is a very weak refutation to your point, I shall enforce that now. According to the same Princeton Survey, a perfectly trustworthy source which my opponent has been constantly pushing away with weak reasoning, 85% of adults in the United States practice religion. Of course there will be more people going to prison who are religious than atheist! With statistics like this, how can you possibly deny that the proportional difference between atheists and religious outside of prison would not affect those who are jailed?

~ "Name one? Ok, Geroge Bush. And if you haven't noticed, a lot of people in the world still believe this, 18% in fact according to a NPR poll."

= Opponent, judges, and friends, 18% is a MINISCULE fraction of the world! Rockylightning says, "If you haven't noticed, a lot of people in the world still believe [that science does not exist]." Obviously, Rockylightning has not put time and thought into this debate, and rather copied and pasted something onto his speech that actually sides with my case. There is no proof listed by Con that George Bush is so religious that he believes the Earth is in the center of the Solar System.

~ "Why didn't god create us and put us in armchairs on beaches with our favorite foods? Why did he make us deal with all the oil spills, wars, crime etc."

= Although this is clear proof that my opponent is not following this debate along the lines of the motion he has set up himself, I shall refute this anyways. We are not arguing whether God exists or not! We are arguing whether or not religion is overall benefitial for the human race. Where in the material that you have stated above does your point tie into the motion? If you really want the answer, talk to me on your free time, please.

~ "Your reasoning is faulty. It's Killing yourself for your religion that makes you go to paradise, not just committing suicide in general."

= My point exactly. If people killed themselves for their religion, the people who practice that religion would all be dead due to suicide, and the religion would have long since died out. It's not faulty reasoning, but reasonable reason.

~ "Again, your reasoning is faulty, and you are putting words in my mouth. The cause of the renaissance was the uncovering of all texts, not just religious, but also scientific etc. They were uncovering the texts the church hid from them. This point was not refuted."

= Then allow me to address this point now. I have stated that even though the Church may have hidden these texts, it wasn't all text that started the Renaissance. Most to all religious Renaissance creations are in the form of art based upon the Greek and Roman architecture and states which still remained around them. Some forms if art included pictures related to Church teachings, ones which the Church clearly would not hide away from the people.

~ "You do not get this point. Religion creates another thing to tease people about. Enough Said. You have not refuted this point."

= Sure, religion creates another thing to tease about, but differences are what make the world so rich – imagine a world where everyone looked the same, dressed the same, acted the same, and so on. What kind of diverse world would that be? You have stated that people have minds to innovate, think, and invent. A world with no diversity provides nothing for this and nothing for your case.

~ "... It has been long since proved that the people who hijacked the planes were Islamic extremists. You cannot deny this fact."

= Yes, they were Islamic. Yes, they were extremists. However, is there any proof that what they committed has any tie in with teachings of their religion? If you had simply stated a quote out of the Qu'ran stating this, then we could debate your point. Though you do have a point in that they were extremists, there are always exceptions of extremes committed by people of other religions. The man who recently killed an abortion doctor was religious and went to Church. It's the same idea. I also still do not appreciate your messy cover-up of trying to jam videos in to scare people into thinking that everything horrible in the world is caused by religion with absolutely no evidence to back it up.

~ "The natural right of life will tip the scale much farther than any of your arguments"

= As you have stated earlier, there is no written or oral constitution for the human race. Some countries may not support the natural right of life, sadly enough. Religion is not a main factor within the violations to this right – you have given no evidence stating that shoot-outs and murders are due to religious teachings. They could have well been out of anger or vengeance.

~ "The effects are still echoing on our Earth. It's like saying ‘The Holocaust happened years ago, therefore it doesn't matter'"

= Of course the Holocaust happened. Some schools teach it along with the Spanish Inquisition. Knowing about these things teaches youth and young adults to learn to respect people for who they are.

~ "Why do you bring up the constitution? First, some countries have no constitution. Second the US was not mentioned in the motion. Third, the human race has no constitution."

= That is a great point and I am glad that you brought it up for clarification. I am just using the United States as an example (we are part of the human race, are we not?) in how religion is beneficial – our country was born from religion. The first to arrive in the Americas to start the colonies before any other immigrants were British who wanted religious freedom. Religion shaped our country, and using the United States as an example and fraction of the human race, this proves that religion is beneficial.

~ "Then why do you state that religion gives you a healthier body? Do you know what your points are?"

= Yes, I'm sorry for such late clarification. When I said that it is soothing and comforting to those in pain such as medieval Asians or slaves, which is what I meant by a healthier body – psychologically. I'm sorry if you thought that it meant physical; I should have clarified that earlier for you to debate.

Now, to summarize.

Let's look at this debate on a whole. The first round, Rockylightning challenged me with the motion "Religion is overall beneficial on the human race." His first round points and arguments were backed up with one source: urbandictionary.com and a very inappropriate and derogatory phrase which I have never heard of, the "Allah Boom," against a certain religion. This proved nothing. His other arguments were about how God does not exist. That does not follow up the motion which he himself has set up for this debate.

The second round, he provided no factual evidence that any of these horrible acts of violence were due to religious teachings. It doesn't matter if these people are religious or not – his points do not and will not have any relevance to the debate unless he ties it in. He also put in all of these mini horror-movie clips from youtube.com to show that religion causes harm, again, with no tied-in relevance to this debate.

His source: urbandictionary.com

He has stated all his points within the first round, all of which I have just proven irrelevant to this debate's motion.

Please, judges, judge on who won the debate, not on biased beliefs. this is not a survey.
Sources: Dictionary.com, Princeton, Sikhphilosophy.net
Debate Round No. 3
52 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by debateZurZdonkeyZoff 6 years ago
debateZurZdonkeyZoff
if there is a god and if he is watching us all then he can't have a conscious or he made the universe and gave up on humans round about adam and eve
so god has no conscious and is not all good or god doesn't love you makes me want to talk up Religion
Posted by SoSilly 6 years ago
SoSilly
Religion isn't completely based on reason, that is the main reason why it isn't beneficial.
Posted by lovelife 7 years ago
lovelife
Some of this was kinda stupid.

Not everyone that practices religion is bad, and not everyone who doesn't is bad. It's individual.

Terrorists would find some other reason to attack, because they want to.

People blamed and killed others for mysterious things, "witches", and prolly would even if they weren't religious.

However it does block ppl from being open minded. I know alot of homophobes, and I'm close to some (my dad's that way) the #1 answer I get why gays shouldn't marry is "its against my religion" so? Your religion isn't their's. They have the right to persue happiness, their own choices. Religion is a leech to. It teaches people to judge others and start war. The bible says "judge not yest ye be judged" how many christians follow that? I know some do, and thats great, but a larger percent judge.

They find I read the Satanic bible and like the philosophy and judge me as a devil worshipping demon thing. I like most Christian philosophy too. I like the philosophy of many religions, but as a religion it tends to get out of control.

Satanism believes in living for yourself. Don't cause harm to others, especially children and animals. It believes in being yourself and finding the balance of indulgence without a god, and satan as a force of evil thats in nature that clouds your thoughts. (not worshipping the evil force, fighting it, but not believing in a physical satan just an idea of evil in the world)

Christianity believes in one narrow path with many similar ones close and branching off, but if you don't go to the right one you go strait to hell!!! But no worries God sent his son as a saacrifice and now he's nice and might let you in heaven if you stray. As long as you believe in him and his son and ask for forgiveness.

Really I believe all reliogion evolves, gets replaced, and someday the Christian reign of popularity will be replaced and later laughed at (in several generation prolly. Like the greek gods/goddesses and many others)
Posted by carman16 7 years ago
carman16
Haha your dead >_o
Posted by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
An F-Bomb isn't respectful.
Posted by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
I hear it everyday.
Posted by CrysisPillar 7 years ago
CrysisPillar
Also, posting "Allah boom" as a point definetely lost some points for conduct right there. That is not even a phrase which you hear in everyday life, nor is it respectful.
Posted by CrysisPillar 7 years ago
CrysisPillar
I agreed with myself before and after, and I do agree that I had the better conduct. My spelling was iffy. Stating that you think your arguments are convinving because it is your side does mean that they were necessarily convincing, but if you thought they were, then fine. You stated sources, and I did too. However, almost all of your points were focused around terrorism, and you did not follow your points up with the very motion which you established. your arguements lacked support and connection to the motion.
Posted by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
I do agree with myself before and after, I think I had better conduct, I had no spelling mistakes, I had convincing arguments because I made them so I'm already convinced, and I stated sources while you didn't. therefore it's not vote-bombing
Posted by Rockylightning 7 years ago
Rockylightning
it's not votebombing if that's my actual vote
25 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Studious_Christian 6 years ago
Studious_Christian
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by shadow835 6 years ago
shadow835
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 
Vote Placed by mongoosecake 7 years ago
mongoosecake
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 
Vote Placed by dashdustrider 7 years ago
dashdustrider
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by jwljacl 7 years ago
jwljacl
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 
Vote Placed by gayaznpanda94 7 years ago
gayaznpanda94
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by Madoki 7 years ago
Madoki
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by lovelife 7 years ago
lovelife
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Vote Placed by Valtarov 7 years ago
Valtarov
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:07 
Vote Placed by Atheism 7 years ago
Atheism
RockylightningCrysisPillarTied
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