The Instigator
gr33k_fr33k5
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
GeoLaureate8
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

The affect of Christianity has had an positive affect on humankind overall

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/28/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,433 times Debate No: 10232
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (4)

 

gr33k_fr33k5

Pro

I look forward to this debate, and I hope that you will accept. . . . I know that this is different from the original debate by Freeman, however I've been wanting to debate this topic for quite some time. . . .

To win this argument you must prove that Christianity has had more of a negative affect on humankind in general, rather than a positive.

Also - I would ask the opposition to allow me to leave the "sin-nature" of man as a given, if not I understand .. .

-----------Contention I: The Bible upholds human dignity and has supported the sanctity of life -----------
Genisis 1:27 So God created man in his own image,
in the image of God he created him;
male and female he created them.

is there any greater honor than to be mad "in the image" of the supposed almighty creator of the universe? . .. .if so I'd like you to show me. THE most important story in the Bible is the Gospel, this is a quick summary of it: God loved people so much that he became man and died for us. .. . the almighty immortal God died for us mortal humans. . . .again this upholds the importance of human life.

---------Contention 2: The Bible has created a base, from which societies can grow and flourish--------
As an example of this I will use America. Granted, It is well known that the Founding Fathers, though not all Christians, understood the inherent good of Biblical principles and used many of them in the creation process of our Constitution. In no small part due to these very principles, America has flourished and grown to be the most powerful nation in the world in just 200 years. . ..

--------Contention 3: Christianity teaches that we should care for the poor--------
Philanthropy is definitely a positive thing for humankind, to show that Christianity teaches this I will merely cite a few examples from the Bible . . .
---- Exodus 23:6 "Do not deny justice to your poor people in their lawsuits."
---- Luke 14:13 "But when you give a banquet, invite the poor, the crippled, the lame, the blind . . ."

--------Contention 4: Christianity teaches peace between people-------
---- Colossians 3:12 Therefore, as God's chosen people, holy and dearly loved, clothe yourselves with compassion, kindness, humility, gentleness and patience.

This is a very touchy subject for many Christians, and often provides a source of confusion for Christians and non Christians alike. However, repeatedly the Bible speaks of peace. . . . on of the ten commandments is "though shalt not murder" . . . It is a general consensus that peace would better society, and is a positive affect, and Christianity supports this.
*All scriptures from the ~New International Version Bible~

Definitions:
*all definitions from ~dictionary.com~

Christian: a person who believes in Jesus Christ; adherent of Christianity.
Positive Affect: anything that has done more good than harm
Human kind: The human race
GeoLaureate8

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for instigating this debate and hope it turns out to be a good one.
.
.

=====================================================
Contention I: The Bible upholds human dignity and has supported the sanctity of life
=====================================================

My opponent's first contention is false. He claims that being made in the image of God is the greatest honor, and that somehow it upholds human dignity. My opponent fails to realize that one of the main tenets of Christianity is that we are all born as evil sinners. Every person is responsible for the sins of Adam and Eve, and we now undeservingly carry that burden. Christian doctrine states that everyone is impure, and can only be saved by accepting Jesus Christ and Christian dogma. This is a degrading insult to everyone who is not a Christian.

I would also like to point out that the Bible defines the value of human life in dollars and cents, and specifies that babies are utterly worthless.

--Verses--

*1.00 Shekel = 0.2621 U.S. Dollar

"And thy estimation shall be of the male from twenty years old even unto sixty years old, even thy estimation shall be fifty shekels of silver." - Leviticus 27:3

"And if it be a female, then thy estimation shall be thirty shekels." - Leviticus 27:4

-- Males (20 - 60 years old) are worth 50 shekels.
-- Females are worth 30 shekels.

"And if it be from five years old even unto twenty years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male twenty shekels, and for the female ten shekels." - Leviticus 27:5

-- Males (5 - 20 years old) are worth 20 shekels.
-- Females are worth 10 shekels.

"And if it be from a month old even unto five years old, then thy estimation shall be of the male five shekels of silver, and for the female thy estimation shall be three shekels of silver." - Leviticus 27:6

-- Males (< 5 years old) are worth 5 shekels.
-- Females are worth 3 shekels.
-- Babies (and fetuses) less than one month old are worth nothing.

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

My opponent likes to think that the Bible upholds human dignity and sanctity of life, yet the Bible says my opponent is worth $5.00.

========================================================
Contention 2: The Bible has created a base, from which societies can grow and flourish
========================================================

{*As an example of this I will use America. Granted, It is well known that the Founding Fathers, though not all Christians, understood the inherent good of Biblical principles and used many of them in the creation process of our Constitution.*}

This is completely and utterly false. Just look at what the founding fathers had to say about Christianity:

--Quotes--

"Christianity neither is, nor ever was a part of the common law" - Thomas Jefferson

"We discover [in the gospels] a groundwork of vulgar ignorance, of things impossible, of superstition, fanaticism and fabrication." - Thomas Jefferson

"Christianity is the most perverted system that ever shone on man." - Thomas Jefferson

"All national institutions of churches, whether Jewish, Christian, or Turkish, appear to me no other than human inventions, set up to terrify and enslave mankind, and monopolize power and profit." - Thomas Paine

"The Bible is such a book of lies and contradictions there is no knowing which part to believe or whether any." - Thomas Paine

--------

As you can see, my opponent is sadly mistaken if he thinks this country was founded by and founded on Christian principles.

==========================================
Contention 3: Christianity teaches that we should care for the poor
==========================================

My opponent says that Christianity teaches that we should care for the poor. However, the Bible also says things contradictory to that:

--Verses--

"Surely these are poor; they are foolish: for they know not the way of the LORD" - Jeremiah 5:4

"The poor are ruled by the rich, and those who borrow are slaves to the moneylenders." - Proverbs 22:7

"You cannot be the slave of two masters! You will like one more than the other or be more loyal to one than the other. You cannot serve both God and money." - Matthew 6:24

The two verses above state that the poor are slaves of the rich, and therefore more loyal to the rich. People must choose to serve God or money, and the poor have chosen to serve money.

====================================
Contention 4: Christianity teaches peace between people
====================================

My opponent states that the Bible teaches peace, however, this is not true. The Bible is full of violence and continually condones it.

--Verses--

"The Lord is a man of war; the Lord is his name." - Exodus 15:3

"And all the congregation brought him without the camp, and stoned him with stones, and he died; as the LORD commanded Moses." - Numbers 15:35

"And my wrath shall wax hot, and I will kill you with the sword; and your wives shall be widows, and your children fatherless." - Exodus 22:24

"The LORD smote the Ethiopians (1,000,000 Africans)." 2 Chronicles 14:12

=============
Problems of Religion
=============

Even if we were to grant that religion was peaceful and moral, it is opposed to free thought and the pursuit of truth. It holds that blind faith/belief without evidence is a virtue, and any thought or information that contradicts the religious belief system must be false. It's the ultimate prison of the mind. This hinders scientific discovery. Everytime science discovers something that happens to contradict religious dogma, it is opposed violently or otherwise. It condemns those who require evidence to eternal torture.

A person is to be constantly watched and judged by big brother in the sky who can convict you of thought crime. It teaches that the natural world is evil (they use insulting words like "materialistic" or "worldly") and something to be loathed, rather than cared for and respected. This is why Christianity fails as a force for good in this world.

=======
Conclusion
=======

In conclusion, all of my opponent's contentions have been effectively refuted. My opponent tried to tout Christianity as some moral system that positively influenced humanity. However, there is an immense amount of dark and immoral teachings in Christianity that my opponent overlooked. This is generally what happens in religion. They cherry-pick the good verses, and then claim that they have a good influence and provide morals. The problem is that there are an equal amount of bad, immoral verses that they ignore. What is happening here is that there is an internal morality within them that decides what's moral and immoral in the Bible, and thus, proves that religion has no influence on morality.

Resolution NEGATED.

Sources:

[1] http://skepticsannotatedbible.com...
[2] http://afgen.com...
Debate Round No. 1
gr33k_fr33k5

Pro

Again, thanks to my opponent for the debate . . . I definitely have my work cut out for me with the defence of my contentions. . . but here goes. . .

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 1: The Bible upholds human dignity and has supported the sanctity of life
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
you state that "the Bible defines the value of human life in dollars and cents. . . "
This, plainly said, is not true

This Law firstly, is in the Old Testament, which means that it no longer applies to Christians, in fact all of the laws of the Old Testament no longer apply to us today, I could expound but I'd ask you to take me on my word. (if you want I can quote scripture in the comment section, just put a note at the top of your next argument).

Now, grabbing random scriptures out of the Bible is a foolish way of debating against it, primarily because the Bible generally needs to be read in context. For example, imagine flipping to a random page of Uncle Tom's Cabin and finding the word "nigger" . . . . would you claim that the book is an exaltation of slavery and racism? Certainly not, so I would ask that you have the same respect for the Bible in your rebuttals.

Now, I will shed some light on Leviticus 27. . . .
A confusing chapter, however this does not at all put "prices" on people. I will refute this using history, People who "dedicated" themselves, or their children, would pay a price to the Levites. While zeal was encouraged it was not something that they wanted to be out of control. So, they put a maximum on the amount of money possible for you to donate when you dedicated yourself according to age.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 2: The Bible has created a base, from which societies can grow and flourish
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I agree, I should have been more wary with my words and I apologize. I thought that "though not all Christians" would satisfy primarily Thomas Jefferson's beliefs. . . . I was not as aware of Thomas Paine's beliefs about Christianity . . .

However, regardless of the beliefs of two of the founding fathers, others were Christians, and their choices were influenced by religion.

"Let us with caution indulge the supposition, that morality can be maintained without religions."
George Washington

"We Recognize No Sovereign but God, and no King but Jesus!"
John Adams and John Hancock

My point with these quotes is to show that many of the founding fathers WERE religious, if not Christians. So, would you say that they just forgot their religion when they created the Constitution? I think not. . . .

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 3: Christianity teaches that we should care for the poor
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Again, your entire refutation relies upon random verses out of the Bible with no context given. It is almost as though you googled, "Bible Verses against poor people" or some such nonsense. Anyways, I will deal with these verses one at a time, refuting each one . . .

Jeremiah 5:4
I will use history to prove why this verse is not against the poor. It merely states a fact of the time, the poor were foolish . . . and don't understand the reasons why they were being punished by God at the time. This makes perfect sense and is very simple to understand. The poor people are focused on only survival, they have no money, many are diseased, and worst of all they are completely uneducated (I'm generalizing, please forgive me . . . ). Is it not fair to call them foolish then?

Proverbs 22:7
Again, I will use history. The "poor" are as I said above, were uneducated, had no money, and were often diseased. They relied upon the generosity of "the rich" . . . .in this context, "slave" refers to anyone who relies on something or someone else. This is not calling us to make slaves out of poor people . .. . that doesn't make any sense. It is merely stating a fact of the time.

Mathew 6:24
I will refute this by going back to the original language that the Bible was written in. "Money" in this verse is symbolic of selfishness and greed. They same Greek word for money was also the word for the god of selfishness and greed. Frankly I don't understand how my opponent got that the poor have "chosen to serve money" from this verse. I'm still scratching my head. . .

----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 4: Christianity teaches peace between people
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

Christians understand that the Old Testament Law has passed away. So, while it is true that there is violence in the Bible, does it condone it? There is a time for peace, and there is a time for war, the Bible tells us that peace is better than war, but at times war is necessary. Your verses are amusing, but rather detached from the real argument. Exodus 22:24 and 2 Chronicles 14:12 both talk about the vengeance of the Lord, they are NOT condoning the slaughter of people. God is not telling us to go on a "jihad" against the Ethiopians. Is stating historical facts condoning violence? . . . .that doesn't make any sense. Is upholding the law condoning violence? Numbers 15:35 depicts a scene where that is exactly what happens. So, I suppose my opponent would argue that Capital Punishment condones murdering people, punishment is meant to deter further wrong-doing. . . .again, my opponent is wrong. .. .

-------------------
Pros of Religion
-------------------

The Christian faith provides a base of truth for all that we as humans deal with in life. It gives us the plaster with which we may mold our world view. Religion is NOT opposed to the pursuit of truth, it merely gives you an absolute truth to start with. The Christian religion does not advocate the hindrance of scientific discovery. Why? Because God created this awesome world for us to discover, why would he decide to try to "keep us in the dark?" It makes no sense. I would argue that science has never truly found something contradictory to scripture, nothing that we are absolutely sure of that is. . .. . speculations and hypothesis may contradict religion however true scientific laws do not.

Is a religion that teaches people to care for those less fortunate really teaching us to "loath" the "worldly?" It calls for us to show love to those who are "lost." NEVER loath . . .. a sad misconception and certainly not true. These things prove that Christianity is a positive force in the world.
GeoLaureate8

Con

======================================================
Contention 1: The Bible upholds human dignity and has supported the sanctity of life
======================================================

{*This Law firstly, is in the Old Testament, which means that it no longer applies to Christians, in fact all of the laws of the Old Testament no longer apply to us today*}

My opponent claims that the Old Testament no longer applies to Christians, but I have to ask, why is it still in the Bible if it is irrelevant? If we say that it no longer applies, then neither does Genesis, Adam and Eve, Noah's Ark, or the 10 Commandments, which are all core beliefs of Christianity.

My opponent accuses me of taking Bible quotes out of context and compares it to calling a fiction book an abomination because it talks about slavery. The problem is that the Bible is not meant to be fiction, it's supposed to be taken as truth. It's not like the Bible is saying that there was killing from a third person perspective. I can actually quote the Bible where Yahweh himself commands and condones violent acts. Nothing was taken out of context and the only defense I've ever heard was that the people deserved to be violently attacked or killed, which is a weak excuse.

My point concerning a cheap dollar and cent value of people has been left uncontended. He tried to attribute this to the Levites as if it were something they did amongst themselves. However, these values were assigned directly by Yahweh.

========================================================
Contention 2: The Bible has created a base, from which societies can grow and flourish
========================================================

{*My point with these quotes is to show that many of the founding fathers WERE religious, if not Christians. So, would you say that they just forgot their religion when they created the Constitution? I think not.*}

My opponent argues that the Constitution was influenced by religion, however he fails to realize that James Madison, who was against religion, was the primary author of the Constitution. That's why he's called the "Father of the Constitution." [1]

"Religious bondage shackles and debilitates the mind and unfits it for every noble enterprise." - James Madison [2]

"Experience witnesseth that ecclesiastical establishments, instead of maintaining the purity and efficacy of religion, have had a contrary operation. During almost fifteen centuries has the legal establishment of Christianity been on trial. What has been its fruits? More or less, in all places, pride and indolence in the clergy; ignorance and servility in the laity; in both, superstition, bigotry and persecution." - James Madison [2]

===========================================
Contention 3: Christianity teaches that we should care for the poor
===========================================

My opponent really didn't refute this point. He attempted to make the quotes not look as bad. But again, the Bible has some verses telling us to care for the poor, and others that condemn poor people. These two contradictory ideas really just make the Bible irrelevant because they cancel each other out and you're left with nothing.

=====================================
Contention 4: Christianity teaches peace between people
=====================================

My opponent points out that the violent acts of Yahweh are not promotions of the violent acts. There's two problems with this. I can point to many, many verses of the Bible where Yahweh directly commands people to stone people or wipe out entire nations. The other problem is that, even if Yahweh committed violent acts without promoting them, he is a role-model for the people. He's the all-loving, wise, omnibenevolent God and if people see him wipe out 1,000,000 Ethiopians, it indicates that these acts are OK and noble.

"Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones." - Psalms 137:9

The contention is that Christianity teaches peace, yet he tells us that the Bible says there's a time for peace and a time for war. He also wants to disregard the Old Testament and proclaim that it's irrelevant to Christianity. Fine, even if we were to grant that and leave us with the New Testament, look what we have here:

"I came not to bring peace, but a sword." - Jesus [3]

"Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division." - Jesus [3]

"He that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one." - Jesus [3]

It is clear that Christianity DOES NOT teach peace, but violence and division.

==========
Cons of Religion
==========

{*Religion is NOT opposed to the pursuit of truth, it merely gives you an absolute truth to start with.*}

How can you pursue truth if you beLIEve you already found it? What Christianity proclaims as truth, is an unchanging truth (much has already been proven fallacy) not open to new knowledge that is contradictory to it.

{*The Christian religion does not advocate the hindrance of scientific discovery. Why? Because God created this awesome world for us to discover, why would he decide to try to "keep us in the dark?" It makes no sense. I would argue that science has never truly found something contradictory to scripture, nothing that we are absolutely sure of that is speculations and hypothesis may contradict religion however true scientific laws do not.*}

First Law of Thermodynamics states that matter and energy cannot be created nor destroyed. Christianity ignores that and still says that God created matter. Science says that we evolved into the complex beings we are now, Christianity says the space daddy made us from sand and a rib in an instant. Science says miracles (that defy scientific laws) can't happen, Christianity says they do.

=======
Conclusion
=======

I affirm that Christianity most certainly is a force evil in the world. The fact that it's disguised as morally superior makes it more dangerous. There are toxic teachings and the very nature of religion is opposed to science and philosophy. Religion is a concrete, unchanging belief system while science and philosophy are always growing, progressing, and adding more new knowledge.

I thank you all for reading this controversial debate.

Sources:

[1] http://www.thefreelibrary.com...
[2] http://afgen.com...
[3] http://www.skepticsannotatedbible.com...
Debate Round No. 2
gr33k_fr33k5

Pro

This debate continues to challenge my thinking, so once again I thank my opponent. . . .

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 1: The Bible upholds human dignity and has supported the sanctity of life
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I would like to start by apologizing for my poorly worded argument. It was clear to me at the time that I wrote it and reviewed it, however looking at it now I can see the confusion it may have caused. . . . now for my defense

My opponent has failed to explain any greater honor than being made in the image of God himself, this inherently puts the value of human life above that of animals or any other living thing. I will again ask my opponent to show any greater honor. Regardless of "the fall of man" we are still an image of God himself something that nothing else in all of creation can boast.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 2: The Bible has created a base, from which societies can grow and flourish
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I would ask my opponent to allow me to drop this argument as it is near to impossible to defend, we could count how many of the founders were religious and compare it to how many were not, and this is ultimately what the end of this contention will be. Ultimately it was weak to begin with and I would like to focus on more interesting contentions.

------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 3: Christianity teaches that we should care for the poor
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I argue that I have effectively refuted the scriptures that you brought up. Since they are stated in the Bible, the only way to refute them is by showing that you have either taken the verses out of context or have misconstrued the meaning of the verse. I effectively showed that you did this for each verse by showing the true meanings of each verse individually.

--------------------------------------------------------------------
Contention 4: Christianity teaches peace between people
--------------------------------------------------------------------
I would argue that there is indeed a time for peace and a time for war. However the Bible does teach peace, as seen in this verse

2 Timothy 2:22
Flee the evil desires of youth, and pursue righteousness, faith, love and peace, along with those who call on the Lord out of a pure heart.

Ephesians 4:3
Make every effort to keep the unity of the Spirit through the bond of peace.

Colossians 3:15
Let the peace of Christ rule in your hearts, since as members of one body you were called to peace. And be thankful.

Psalm 137 is a lament for the impeding doom of Jerusalem. Jerusalem has always been the most sacred of cities for Jews, this is not a call for Christians to "dash babies" on anything . . . someone who really thinks that must be completely ignorant, once again you are taking another scripture out of context.
GeoLaureate8

Con

======================================================
Contention 1: The Bible upholds human dignity and has supported the sanctity of life
======================================================

{*My opponent has failed to explain any greater honor than being made in the image of God himself, this inherently puts the value of human life above that of animals or any other living thing. I will again ask my opponent to show any greater honor.*}

Fair enough. As requested by my opponent, I will provide an even greater honor than being made in the image of God.

The reality of our existence is a much greater honor. As the great astrophysicist, Neil deGrasse Tyson said: "I know that the molecules in my body are traceable to phenomena in the Cosmos. That makes me want to grab people in the street and say, have you heard this?!"

Carl Sagan also emphasized the greatness of our existence: "The Cosmos is also within us. We're made of star stuff. We are a way for the cosmos to know itself."

Each and every one of us is a unique manifestation of the Universe, and this fact is a much greater honor. I find the idea that we are all servants to a celestial dictator is rather degrading to us. Your God made us inferior (according to your paradigm), while the Universe has made each of us unique, and does not require worship, submission, and cruel sacrifices.

========================================================
Contention 2: The Bible has created a base, from which societies can grow and flourish
========================================================

My opponent has dropped this contention.

===========================================
Contention 3: Christianity teaches that we should care for the poor
===========================================

My point still remains that the Bible has some teachings for and against the poor. He claims that the examples I provided were taken out of context so he tried explaining them away, but failed.

====================================
Contention 4: Christianity teaches peace between people
====================================

My opponent merely posted some peaceful Bible verses. The problem is that there are a great deal of both violent and peaceful verses. However, he says there is a time for war and a time for peace, but what does this really mean? Peace is inevitable even if the Christian God were to only promote violence, because even the most sinister serial killer cannot be violent 24 hours a day.

Another important point is that Christianity by its very nature is divisive because it separates the Christians from the non-Christians and automatically creates animosity between the two groups.

==========
Cons of Religion
==========

This point has not been contended.

=======
Conclusion
=======

Resolution NEGATED.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by gr33k_fr33k5 7 years ago
gr33k_fr33k5
well, I have now noticed that my final point was cut off of my debate . . . . I jjust love copying and pasting from Micrsoft Word. . . . . however; good debate, I definitely had fun, and once I get better at this stuff.. . . mayb we could debate a similar topic again!. . . . .

MikeLovn,
. . . . your right . . .. this is my second debate. . . . and I'm still being amazed at how smart some of these people are. . . . . emphasis on "some" . . . . . I figure I'll get a good 50 debates with this account, I'll be better and smarter, and then make a new account and REALLY start to debate. . . .
Posted by MikeLoviN 7 years ago
MikeLoviN
I don't think i would say it's entirely irrelevant, I just believe that it shouldn't be interpreted literally in the sense that everything written in it is taken as fact. As such, i would say that "the bible says..." isn't valid proof of anything. The bible says a lot of things, some of it self-contradictory. It's a book, written (and probably re-written) over hundreds of years.

The way I view the Bible in relation to Christianity is as a very general guidebook who's only purpose is to help guide the average person in the right direction with an overall underlying message. Things like 'love your neighbour' and 'treat the others the way you would want to be treated'. That's it.

I don't know if that made much sense to you. I feel like I might have trailed off a bit, but there it is.

Also, my last comment was meant as a bit of advice to pro. I've seen debates here before where people have tried to use the Bible as a source and ended up getting torn apart, and rightfully so.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
@MikeLovin

Just curious, why do you think the Bible is irrelevant to Christianity?
Posted by MikeLoviN 7 years ago
MikeLoviN
"-----------Contention I: The Bible...."

Game, set and match to Con. Clearly you haven't been on this site for very long.
Posted by Freeman 7 years ago
Freeman
I'm so happy to see that my thoughts are sparking other debates on the site. :)

Hopefully inquiretruth will come back sometime soon so that our debate can start.
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Can you change the character limit to 7,000 please? Thanks.
Posted by gr33k_fr33k5 7 years ago
gr33k_fr33k5
cheah man. . . .thanks . .. how about I just stik to Christianity.. .. mayb ill just make the same debate title as freeman. . . xept then you'd have an entire debate written for you. . . .. haha . . . .ummm . . . .Ill change it. .. . but its thanksgiving and im gonna b outta town. . . so I'd ask you not to accept the debate until friday. . . ..otherwise i will have to forfeit. . . sorry about that
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
Ok. Two things. Remove the stuff about Social Darwinism, or any kind of Darwinism, since I'm not really a supporter. Remove the stuff about the influences because there's very little disagreement in that regard.

I would suggest perhaps you change the resolution to just "Christianity" and I could be Con, you could be Pro. You can also include stuff like the morality of Christianity vs. Secularism, because that's kind of where you were going with this debate.

Does that work for you?
Posted by gr33k_fr33k5 7 years ago
gr33k_fr33k5
oh sorry, I thought that I had posted a comment already. I understand your point that it would not be fair, perhaps you could suggest a new title for the debate, this way I could keep this challenge and merely edit my debatte terms to match what you had in mind. Win or lose, I'm really looking foorward to this debate
Posted by GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
So you can keep some parts of the debate, but I will not defend Social Darwinism.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by dogparktom 7 years ago
dogparktom
gr33k_fr33k5GeoLaureate8Tied
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 Mangani 7 years ago
Mangani
gr33k_fr33k5GeoLaureate8Tied
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 GeoLaureate8 7 years ago
GeoLaureate8
gr33k_fr33k5GeoLaureate8Tied
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 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 Rob1Billion 7 years ago
Rob1Billion
gr33k_fr33k5GeoLaureate8Tied
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:04