The Instigator
dabigdood
Pro (for)
Losing
18 Points
The Contender
dominasian
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

The world would be better off without religion!

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: 2/14/2008 Category: Religion
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,177 times Debate No: 2656
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (10)
Votes (12)

 

dabigdood

Pro

religion causes violence and hatred. For example: The jews were killed in the holocaust because of their religion, they were also killed in the crusades by the Christians in the middle ages for a false accusation that they killed Jesus Christ.

The "holy land" of Jerusalem is fought over in the middle east causing the hatred of the Israelis and the Muslim peoples of surrounding countries.

Also the violence in Middle Eastern countries between the Sunnis and Shi'as, different sects of the Muslim religion, can be attributed to subtle differences in their beliefs of the same religion.

Religious groups have also caused many areas with pain because of their elitist views that everyone that is not of the same religion as them is wrong and therefore must be converted.
dominasian

Con

Responses
- mass murder
- happens for non religious reasons too, and by atheists
according St�phane Courtois author of "The Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror Repression"( Harvard University Press, 1999.) over 20 millions deaths can be attributed to stalin, the atheist's regime.
- also while you show has religion has created problems, its just as easy to show you that it has helped and the same goes for atheism to. However in this entire case you fail to prove why the world is better off with an atheistic society

i am lazy and will only post one argument
- In a society without religion, everyone would be atheists, right?
This means all the governmental leaders would also be atheist. If you look to the most murderous leaders in history almost all of them have been atheists. Mao Zedong according to the source List and Detailed Death Tolls for the Twentieth Century Hemoclysm. (Historical Atlas of the Twentieth Century. Retrieved on 2007-02-27.) was responsible for a death toll in the tens of millions. Then stallin whose slaughter,as i previously pointed out, also had a death toll also in the tens of millions.

on the btw im an atheist, i was just kinda bored
Debate Round No. 1
dabigdood

Pro

I should have made the resolution a little more clear, what I should've said was the world would have been better off if there was no religion ever.

I guess I'll talk about your point now...

Technically nobody would be atheist, because everybody would be atheist so there would be no "god" to not believe in

The reason Stalin killed all of those people was because he wanted to rid the world of religion, if there was no religion there would be no reason for him to kill all of those people.

The same argument is true for Hitler, an atheist leader. The reason for his persecution of the Jews was that when he rose to power through the ashes of a poverty ridden Germany, after the devastating loss in the first world war, the country was under the impression that the Jewish people wanted to plunge the country back into a communist regime because most of the leaders of that revolutionary party were Jewish. Without religion, Hitler would not be able to punish any tangible group other than the revolutionary party itself.

Again with Mao, he was attacking a religion as well as the western ideals. With no religion to attack the motives for his attacks would be eliminated.

(you said) "However in this entire case you fail to prove why the world is better off with an atheistic society"
This is very true, so I will now tell you why. I think we can all agree that violence is a bad thing and I will prove that religion causes violence so if you take religion out of the equation then you also take some violence out of it. It also takes one more difference out of the world, we have enough to fight about already with different races and ideals we don't need another.

Responses to your responses...

-mass murder
Your examples that mass murder happen for other reasons I have already addressed and disagreed with saying the reason for Stalin's killings was to eliminate religion and if religion never existed it would not ever be a reason for killings.

-you agree that it causes problems but say "ts just as easy to show you that it has helped and the same goes for atheism to." I would like three examples of it helping. Also you can't make the argument that atheism has hurt because without religion there would be no atheism
dominasian

Con

wow i think this will be fairly short, and kinda mixed up

your arguments that religion causes violence are based around two reasons (correct me if im wrong, im not trying to mislead this is just my understanding)
-different religions cause violence
-atheists kill those that are religious
ill respond to the atheist kill religioius people argument first
-by saying that atheists wouldnt have to kill those people if they didnt exist, is justification for black people got killed during the 1800's and well all throughout time, if the color black didnt exist then no black people would have died thus the world would be better off without black people. i think it becomes obvious why this is wrong, murder isnt justified by that sort of logic, in fact there are very few cases where taking the life of another isnt not justified.
but on to the other idea that well if reeligious people hadnt existed then atheists wouldnt have had to kill them. Well if we lived in a matrix like society (with more resrictions similar to the utopian matrix but not quite) wouldnt that also be more beneficial, sure wed have almost no freedom in a sense, but hey very few people would be dying.

Different Religions cause violence
this isnt an argument against religion, this is an argument against multiple religions in existence, if we all had the same religion we wouldnt have these problems. Thus i would argue that yeah, religions are causing vilence, so lets say the world would have been an amazing place if we only had one, and everybody beleived in the exact same set of ideas.
Debate Round No. 2
dabigdood

Pro

dabigdood forfeited this round.
dominasian

Con

dominasian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
dabigdood

Pro

OK so we are both even on the missing of rounds so I will simply restate what I said in the comment I posted and we will continue like nothing happened. Capeesh?

First I would like to point out your arguments are conflicting, you first say a "matrix like" society would be bad and then say that if we all believed in the same thing it would be good.

Then I would like to attack the statement you made about black people. I would say you are twisting what I'm saying. I'm not saying that atheists "have to kill" religious people, I'm saying if there were no religions (atheism is technically a religion) that would be one less difference for people to fight about.
dominasian

Con

dominasian forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
10 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by left_wing_mormon 9 years ago
left_wing_mormon
The jews weren't killed actually due to their religous beliefs in Germany. Hitler said that their culture had overtaken the German ecconomy and the only reason he pin-pointed the Jews was because he hated their ethicity, not their religion. The term Jews in the context of Nazism is relating to the people of Israliel. So it was more of a race thing than a religous thing.

just a point...
Posted by Chuckles 9 years ago
Chuckles
daxitarian still raises a good point, that atheists don't destroy themselves in the name of a god. But you could probably fit that under using religion as an excuse, like i said earlier
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
daxitarian, you are obviously talking about Muslim suicide bombers, but that is also intolerance. When they do that it is because they are intolerant of other religions. Atheists can be extremely intolerable as well. Some Christians can also be intolerable.
Posted by Chuckles 9 years ago
Chuckles
i agree that part of it is that people are sometimes intoleran. I don't believe religion (generally) is violent. I believe religions (again generally) are peaceful. The problem is that people will use religion to gain followers. They wave the flag of religion to get attention. They simply use religion as an excuse for their sins and misdeeds.
Posted by Keithinator 9 years ago
Keithinator
Stalin didn't kill those people in the name of atheism.
Posted by Daxitarian 9 years ago
Daxitarian
The difference between religious fanatics and atheist fanatics is that the atheists don't strap a bomb to their chest expecting to go to heaven when they die. Religion inherently does not cause problems. It is easy to see someone making a religion that would be peaceful. But if you actually read the bible or the koran, they are very violent books. So I don't think it is unfair to point out that religious fanatics aren't really misusing their religions, because that violence is inherent to their religion.

Probably the most harmful effect of religion is that it teaches people to be satisfied with not knowing. Why should you really care about figuring anything out about life, you are going to have God tell you all the answers when you die.
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
That doesn't mean that the world would be a better place without religion. There are fanatics of all religions jsut as there are atheists that are fanatics. I believe that while it may not happen .. intolerance of religions is the problem. I am a Catholic , I believe in God. However I do not care that an atheist doesn't believe in God. However just as an atheist doesn't want a religious person to preach there is a God ...to them . I don't want an atheist to preach there isn't a God to me. I have seen many debates on both sides and it just makes me so angry. Why does anyone feel the need to attack someone else just on their beliefs in religion. Now it is a different story if someone says the Westboro baptist people are wrong in their beliefs because I feel they actually are hateful and hide behind "religion" Just as I believe that Al Qaeda is also hateful and hides behind religion. That to me is wrong. I also think it is wrong when atheists tell me I am wrong in my belief in God and assume all religious people are fruitcakes. I think tolerance as long as someone isn't using their religion as a smoke screen to hate or hurt anyone is needed.
Posted by dabigdood 9 years ago
dabigdood
Thats a good point kels1123, however, sometimes the people that are being intolerant is the teachings of the religion itself. Such as the Christian missionaries that invaded the americas and Africa.
Posted by dabigdood 9 years ago
dabigdood
ooops I forgot about this debate, sorry. I hope typing here is acceptible for all.

First I would like to point out your arguments are conflicting, you first say a "matrix like" society would be bad and then say that if we all believed in the same thing it would be good.

Then I would like to attack the statement you made about black people. I would say you are twisting what I'm saying. I'm not saying that atheists "have to kill" religious people, I'm saying if there were no religions (atheism is technically a religion) that would be one less difference for people to fight about.
Posted by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
Actually it is not religion that causes problems , it is intolerance of religion that cause hatred and problems. For instance your stance that the world would be better off with religion is a case in point, why do you care if others practice their religion . If everyone was just tolerant and let people be with their own religions then religion wouldn't be a problem. Why do have to generalize and say that the world would be better off without religion instead of saying the world would be better off without fanatics or intolerant people.
12 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by dominasian 8 years ago
dominasian
dabigdooddominasianTied
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 yanksfan1987 9 years ago
yanksfan1987
dabigdooddominasianTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by education4earth 9 years ago
education4earth
dabigdooddominasianTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by PreacherFred 9 years ago
PreacherFred
dabigdooddominasianTied
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 
Vote Placed by kingd12 9 years ago
kingd12
dabigdooddominasianTied
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 
Vote Placed by dabigdood 9 years ago
dabigdood
dabigdooddominasianTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by msoshima54 9 years ago
msoshima54
dabigdooddominasianTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by left_wing_mormon 9 years ago
left_wing_mormon
dabigdooddominasianTied
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 
Vote Placed by kels1123 9 years ago
kels1123
dabigdooddominasianTied
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 
Vote Placed by Keithinator 9 years ago
Keithinator
dabigdooddominasianTied
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:30