The Instigator
Rezend
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Pro (for)
Winning
10 Points

Should religion be taught in private schools? (I am against it)

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/17/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 540 times Debate No: 71856
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

Rezend

Con

Arguments will start once someone accepts to argue with me.
I am new here so tell me if there is anything I've done wrong.
I do have good arguments for this, though

Con
Wylted

Pro

Obviously parents should be allowed to have religion taught to their kids in a school they directly pay for.
Debate Round No. 1
Rezend

Con

Thanks for accepting the debate, I hope it goes well whether or not I can convince you.
Here is my logic:
Children are under age and therefore forcing anything into them is wrong, even if it is what their parents want. Why? Well, in my opinion, parents are meant to teach general things to children, not specific things like religion. Why do you think most (not all) children follow their parents' beliefs? Because it is put upon them. They are not taught other religions.
Plus, children don't choose what school they go to. Their parents do, and, as I said, religion shouldn't be imposed on children, even by their parents.
What about other religions? Don't they get a go at forming a child's mind?
Besides, whatever people say, schools teach facts and theories accepted by experts in the specific subject (scientists) and religion has no basis on real facts.
I am in favor of comparative religion being taught (as long as it includes all religions). This way, people get to know more and thus choose more accurately.
Sorry if I was not clear. This is my first debate and English is my second language.
Wylted

Pro

1. The percentage of Hate crimes as a result of religious bias is at 28%. In 2004 it was just 10%. A lot of the perpetrators of these crimes are school aged. As a matter of fact, about 20% of the religiously motivated hate crimes are a result of school aged people.

I think it is important to learn about various cultures and religions in school. If people are taught religion, and more specifically multiple religions, they will be less fearful and more understanding of each other. I think replacing the fear and hatred with knowledge and mutual respect will go a long way towards reducing the number of hate crimes.

2. With schools being more diverse than ever, it is necessary for students to learn about each other's cultures and religions, as well as not being afraid to have their religion as an aspect of their personal identity at school. This understanding and openness will do a lot to curb the unprecedented amount of bullying, currently taking place.

3. Religion has had a huge impact on society as a whole. It has contributed a lot to history and even the sciences (see Big Bang theory). If we don't teach of religions influence on these things in school, kids will not be able to truly grasp history.

4. People should have the right to teach their kids, their faith. There just is no good argument against the freedom to practice whatever religion you feel like, and if a private school is meeting all of the kid's other learning needs, than I see no good reason why they couldn't teach them a course on religion, on top of that as well.

http://mobile.edweek.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Rezend

Con

I will refute your argumentsn individually:
1/2-Didn't see your point there. In my last argument, I said comparative religion was fine. You just confirm it here. What I am against is the learning of only one specific religion at school.
3- Teaching religions for the ways they influenced society is fine, as long as it is all religions and not just one. Also, teaching it that way is very different from the ways people teach it at private schools. I studied in a private school where every day a guy tells me about Jesus as though it were a fact. He never even considers the possibility of it being wrong. He only mentions the bible and never talks about other religions. You know a very descriptive word about this? Indocrination. They brain wash kids since they are little, and that is not fair, it is not human. Out of my entire class (30 people), three didn't follow Christianity after school! Three! That is an absurd.
4-I directly disagree. First, because, at the very least, all faiths should be taught. YOU DO NOT OWE YOUR CHILD. He is free to think what he wants. But how can he, if people just keep telling crazy theories to him as though they were absolute truth?
Thank you, but I really can't see how teaching one religion at school only could possibly be legal. To restate my point: the children do not choose what school they go to. They are forced to go there.
Wylted

Pro

I'll also address my opponent, point by point. (Rebuttals for round 2)

1. My opponent's first argument is that it is wrong to teach you children your belief system, but this is absurd. It is a parent's responsibility to pass on their belief system to their children, especially if they believe it to be a belief system that will condemn a child to eternal torment if they don't learn it. A parent with that belief system has a moral obligation to make sure their child learns their faith. It is actually impossible not to indoctrinate your kid in some way. They will eventually cut off the light when they leave the bathroom, use a spoon to eat cereal or leave the toilet paper with the side that hangs down facing out. It will become the child's belief that those things are the correct way. It might be true, but that is beside the point. The point is that the child learned it through a system of indoctrination and that learning things through indoctrination is inevitable, even if you try to resist it.

My opponent hasn't really mentioned what is wrong with indoctrination. I guess he expects us just to accept that, indoctrination is wrong. I can't accept that indoctrination is automatically bad. It is actually a short cut to learning. We don't often have the time to learn the ins and outs of how things work, but we don't need to. I don't need to know how electricity works, I just have to know how to hit the light switch.

Most of the things we learn in school is also indoctrination. The facts may be supported by evidence, but we don't learn through examining evidence. We don't look at the documents that prove Columbus came to America, we just accept it through the indoctrination process. To say we shouldn't learn through indoctrination at school, would mean that we couldn't even attend school.

2. Religious beliefs can be extremely beneficial. It is common knowledge that religious people are typically happier, live longer and are more successful in life. Going to school should improve your odds of being more succesful, happy and live longer. http://www.washingtonpost.com...
http://en.m.wikipedia.org...
https://www.psychologytoday.com...

I'd say a school that improves a child's life is superior to one that doesn't.

(Counter rebuttals next round)
Debate Round No. 3
Rezend

Con

Rezend forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Rezend

Con

You have the right to teach your religion, yes, as long as you teach other religions too. Your argument about indocrination is really bad. None goes out in the open talking about how cutting off the light is wrong or how colombus did not discover america. There are many people arguing against religion, though. Teach the children All religions, including yours. If yours is really true, then your child will obviously agree with you. It is not a parent's right to teach their children whatever they want. And schools must obviously be censored if you don't want children to learn that the earth is flat. Teach comparative religion, tell children about its relevance in modern day society, but let children lead their own spiritual path. You have not refuted a single one of my arguments.
Vote Con.
Wylted

Pro

I've made several arguments, my opponent has not responded to. He should lose just because he didn't make it clear he was allowing an exception for comparative religious studies. It is not my fault he failed to make that clear in the opening round, I should not be punished for it. My opponent has failed to offer any rebuttals other than bare assertions. Stating things along the line of kids should not be forced to learn their parents religion, and then immediately taking it back by admitting that it is okay for parents to force religion on their children at home.

My opponent has failed to answer many of my arguments. Another one he ignores is my argument that school is a system of indoctrinated learning and that indoctrinated learning can be quite beneficial. He ignores my evidence that kids that learn religion, are more likely to be happy and successful.

Between the dropped arguments and the forfeited round this is an easy vote. Him saying comparative studies is fine, is also a full concession. Vote pro
Debate Round No. 5
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Our_Future_Freedom 1 year ago
Our_Future_Freedom
It has nothing to do whether its science or fact it has to do with the fact of how a private school works. A private school is not like a public school, when you sign up (pay) to send your child to a private school you are basically agreeing to whatever rules or teachings that they have. It is not like a public school...it is a business. When you sign up to go to a private school you know what your getting. You know if the school you are paying for is either religious or non-religious.
Posted by murphymmsc2015 1 year ago
murphymmsc2015
Religion should not be taught in private schools because it is a personal belief which may be contrary to scientific teachings.
Posted by Our_Future_Freedom 1 year ago
Our_Future_Freedom
Its a private school they choose to teach whatever they want to teach. No one is forcing you to go to that school. But it is not like a public school where the people have some say...this is private school, its basically a money making institution.
Posted by americanmade23 1 year ago
americanmade23
religion should not be taught in schools because it goes against science which is fact
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
RezendWyltedTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Pro. Con forfeited a round which is rarely acceptable conduct in any debate setting. S&G - Tie. Con had some minor spelling and grammar errors, but being that English is his second language, and the fact that they truly were minor, I'll let this remain a tie. Arguments - Pro. Con made a pretty large mistake, he instigated a resolution saying that he is against religion being taught in private schools, but then argues that he's for comparative religious studies. This directly contradicts his own stance in the debate. Furthermore, Con wasn't able to rebut each argument raised by Pro, leaving some of them to stand unchallenged. On the flip side, Pro effectively rebutted each point raised by Con, while also pointing out Con's error in holding a contradicting position to the one he posed in the resolution. For these reasons, I believe Pro won arguments. Sources - Pro. Con failed to provide any sources in this debate whereas Pro utilized several. This is a clear win for Pro.
Vote Placed by Defro 1 year ago
Defro
RezendWyltedTied
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: Con loses conduct for forfeiting a round. Also, con did not fully assume his stance. Con is arguing against religion being taught in private schools, but then says in round 2 that con is in favor of religions being taught in school if all of them was taught, which is what he should be arguing against. Pro made a lot of good points that con did not address effectively.