The Instigator
varshachooranolickal
Pro (for)
Tied
1 Points
The Contender
Justinrocks
Con (against)
Tied
1 Points

Why does people need god

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 1 vote the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/10/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 592 times Debate No: 38746
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (1)

 

varshachooranolickal

Pro

Emotional reasons

For some people god and religion overcome certain fears and meet certain emotional needs:
Fear of the unknown - where did everything come from and what is the meaning for life?
Fear of death - the promise of an afterlife gives hope in a sometimes complex and cruel world.
A need for an externally dictated set of rules by which to run their lives.
A need for a support structure to turn to in times of stress: church, temple, synagogue, mosque.
Growing up is hard. Becoming an adult means becoming independent of the support structure of parents, family and home and becoming responsible for your own life and, sometimes, for the lives of others. It means running your life by rules that you personally consider to be fair and just. It also means living within the rules of society and meeting your personal social responsibilities.
Sometimes this step can be hard. Some people cannot do it on their own and never achieve personal independence. They never internalise their own set of social and moral rules but feel safer when they rely on those dictated by a religion.
Non-religious people do not have this problem - they grow up and take personal responsibility for their own lives. They are happy to create their own social (moral) rules and to accept social responsibilities - as long as they consider things to be fair and just. This is why most non-religious people have very strong views on human rights and campaign against all forms of social injustice and discrimination.
Social reasons

Atheists in Kansas enjoy pretty miserable social lives!
In the bible belt of the USA every tiny town has dozens of churches which become the focal points of the social lives of almost all the inhabitants.
All religions are social organisations. They provide not only an opportunity for believers to worship their god but also a social life and support structure that most people need at some time in their lives.
In England the social life of religion remains very important for certain groups of people.
The increasingly elderly population within the CofE find that church gives them something to do, people to talk to and a support structure away from the sometimes frighteningly fast, noisy and aggressive modern world.
Religion provides a point of shared cultural identity for ethnic minority groups - a place where they can share the beliefs that they, their parents or their grandparents had "at home" before they came to England.
For the happy-clappies, the Pentecostal Christians, religion provides the social life, support structure and emotional rush that keeps their batteries charged throughout life - hence the accent on large scale, pop-concert style, meetings: lots of clapping, lots of singing and lots of smiling. Life is good, god is great, Jesus is our saviour - let's all be happy together and forget about the problems of the modern world.
Cynical social reasons
In some cynical cases religion is treated as a means to an end.
Parents may join their local church, or even change their religion, in order to get their children into a school they feel is better than others.
Restricted-entry groups form within religions (for example: Opus Die, The Knights of Columbus, Knights of Malta, etc within the Catholic Church) and such groups are open about the fact that they provide mutual support for their members. In some cases such groups offer personal gain to members (it is easier to do business deals with people who believe the same things than it is to open up those deals to everyone) while in others they have aims which involve the control of the whole of society. Their argument, of course, is that by imposing their beliefs, they will bring benefit to everyone! (Religious arrogance is fundamental to the formation of secret societies.)
Justinrocks

Con

People don't really need God because if I can live my life without praying then praying and ending with unanswered prayers then other people should be able to too.
Debate Round No. 1
varshachooranolickal

Pro

varshachooranolickal forfeited this round.
Justinrocks

Con

So, in turn, if I can live without god than we all can.
Debate Round No. 2
varshachooranolickal

Pro

varshachooranolickal forfeited this round.
Justinrocks

Con

Well folks, vote for whoever you think is the best
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by TetsuRiken 3 years ago
TetsuRiken
Ive found that my life is better without relgion.
Posted by asu1 3 years ago
asu1
You make it sound like anyone who doesn't believe in god has a miserable social life? I'm an atheist and I'm perfectly happy with my social life. Also, your argument that religion provides strict rules for a persons life seems like an argument against religion; as if religion dictates everything anyone should do in their life...
Posted by Justinrocks 3 years ago
Justinrocks
Its more of an opinion debate
Posted by drafterman 3 years ago
drafterman
What's the resolution here?
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
varshachooranolickalJustinrocksTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:11 
Reasons for voting decision: CONDUCT: FF. S&G: I noticed several small mistakes con made, like zero punctuation one round, then massive over punctuation the next. It was highly distracting. ARGUMENT: Con never got into the spirit of this, and did not respond to pro's opening claims. Thus while pro FFed, con never began.