The Instigator
CaldamanTSP
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
LarryD
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Religion is unneeded in this scientific and technological age!

Do you like this debate?NoYes+4
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 3 votes the winner is...
LarryD
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2012 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,315 times Debate No: 21580
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

CaldamanTSP

Pro

RELIGION
Religion is the belief that somewhere someone is watching over us and helping us to better ourselves.

I believe that in today's world religion is exactly what we DONT NEED!

It is distracting people from making something of their life ..... for instance I saw homeless man on the street he held up a sign to me that read "I am only homeless because GOD did not follow up on the promise that was made to me" when I asked the man what the sign read he simply said "when I was young I was promised the world as long as I served god with undisguised faith... so I skipped school to be at his church praising him.... now look where I am"

Now if that man hadn't have been promised the world by a false deity then he would have made something of himself and who knows he could have created a cure for aids... any thing is possible.

I understand that belief is what keeps alt of us going in our times of need.... but why believe god will help when really we should believe in our technology and our friends..... for example I read on the Internet recently that a woman had been "saved by god" she had recently had kidney problems and she had prayed every day and night in the hope that god would save her and find her a donor. meanwhile a doctor was working through the night to find her what she needed in the vain attempt at saving a human life... he eventually found her one and saved her life with the operation.... when she uploaded her story to the Internet it was entitled "Praise be to the man who saved me" the blog went on and on about her beliefs but it was the last line that caught my eye .... it read: "I have none to thank but the lord almighty.... God" I was gob smacked as I believe the only person she should thank should be that doctor.

Therefore this is why our economy is failing we expect our deity to pull through for us when in reality the only people who pull through are the kind hearted loving people we call humans.

Thank you for reading this!
LarryD

Con

I realize that you have formulated an opinion based offf of your experiences. But what i also must bring to your attention is that you have encountered very few people (two in your argument at least) to conclude that these ideas aply to everyone, or a large enough part of the world population to enfluence things so greatly as the economy.
Before i put forth my argument i would also like to say that you predict the outcome of a man's life based on what you THINK would happen, a mistake as ignorant as his, for believeing that some "invisible hand" so to speak would have guided his life to anything more succesful than what it was, when the reality is that these things are not know.
It is easy to say that we should believe in technology, but a road that leads to material is not a road that leads to humanity, or peace. People for as long as humanity has been recorded have sought riches, and technology, but it has done us no good, for where are we? In warm homes, automobiles, societies with malls and luxuries. Yet the smallest portion of our people move to provide the same luxuries to those less fortunate around the world, and even more it is hardly the wealthiest and the ones with the most technology that take these initiatives.
I don't claim that religion is the way to these standards of living, but i also recognize the fact that people in general are distracted by selfishness, doing as you say and reveering technology and all it has to offer... to themselves.
Debate Round No. 1
CaldamanTSP

Pro

I understand what you are saying as my point is indeed based on only 2 experiences but if you consider there is 7 billion people (give or take a few) on the planet and a large portion believe whole heartedly that some "invisible hand" (as you put it) will guide them in their life then you should be able to see that although that one man may or may not have done something wothwhile with his life, someone somewhere in roughly the same position would have.

My argument isnt that we should believe in only technoogy or even scientific advances because as we know they both can be as unreliable as religion but that we should believe in our fellow man/women to guide us on our paths to happiness as they are the "helpers" that enable us to better ourselves and they help us.... Teachers, Doctors, Scienists these are the people that help better the world and make ourselves better.

This is why i think religion is irrellevant our modern society.
LarryD

Con

If you say they can be as unrelilable as religion then what point would there be to say one is irrelivent? Why not both? Because religion has time and time again led people to happiness. If you say science in technology, what would be the definition of happiness? Getting what you want? Religion has many variations, but the most common core value is love and what could be more happy?

With these questions in mind i would like to look into your argument.
First you give the fact that someone is undoubtably in the same situation as that man. I agree. But there are many people who have given way to society, and led equally disturbing life. Religion in the wrong hands, in misunderstanding eyes may very well be what you have described it as. But the world does not consist of generalizations, it is made of many individuals. Unique individuals. I trust you have seen "what would jesus do?" bracelets, posters, clothing etc. If people strived to be like jesus, real or not real, believing or not believing, people would be striving to be happier, at peace, honest, and moral building people. By the same token, Bhudists that strive to be like Bhuda, would avoid partaking in many of the same activities that jesus would. Now,my point is this. I could easily go to my mother and she can say, "this is wrong because of this," but i can also go to church, and they can tell me also why sometihng is wrong.
I trust you believe that people learn in many different ways? Weather it is the emotional connection they feel with a god that is or isnt there, they can learn it. I also trust that you will agree that there is more than one way to learn?

Next, What is it that a teacher can teach you that your priest can't? Calculus? Biology? Similarly to my first argument, these things will build a meaningless world if they are not applied to in the right direction. I do not deny that people of no religion have done good, but religion plays a crucial role in the developement of ethics and morals in todays society as it is fast growing and ideas spread much faster than before.
Debate Round No. 2
CaldamanTSP

Pro

Can i be honest for one moment i can greatly see what you are saying and i would like to say i have lost this argument, but my opinion shall stand as i think that without religion being stuffed down our throats with "WWJD and Rosary beads" we would develop greater ethics than the one we have...... but thank you for sharing your view with me :)
LarryD

Con

I am glad to have shared my views, but again i must say, there is no correct way to learn morals. If rosary beads and wwjd bracelets yeach you compasion than you have learned compasion
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by happy-bread 2 years ago
happy-bread
I greatly disagree with your definition of religion. Technically none of the Eastern religions such as Hinduism and Buddhism would not be religions under your definition because they do not have a personal, involved creator.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Zetsubou 2 years ago
Zetsubou
CaldamanTSPLarryDTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Pro conceded.
Vote Placed by darkkermit 2 years ago
darkkermit
CaldamanTSPLarryDTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: "i can greatly see what you are saying and i would like to say i have lost this argument," PRO states this himself. Not very convincing, if PRO agrees with CON.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 2 years ago
16kadams
CaldamanTSPLarryDTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had a stronger case when talking about morals and other aspects of religion. He showed religion can do things science cant, and pro could have but didn't refute it. SO my vote goes to con.