The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points
The Contender
Cart
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

ban islam

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 4 votes the winner is...
Cart
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/10/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 615 times Debate No: 80791
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (15)
Votes (4)

 

vi_spex

Pro

let it be recognized as the severe mental disease it is and ban it from the civilized world for the civilized world to exist
Cart

Con

It's one thing to say that you disagree Islamic beliefs or that you think they're stupid. I'm not a religious person myself. But I don't think we should "ban Islam".

The 1st Amendment gives us religious freedom, so long as we practice it peacefully.

First of all: How are you going to enforce a ban of Islam? How can you ban something that's an idea, for starters?

To ban something is not to just voluntarily get rid of it, but to use the state as a force to take it away from other people. You are essentially suggesting that if someone is at a mosque, they should be rounded up by the police, fined and put in jail.

There are hundreds of millions of people who are muslim, and only a trace of a trace minority) of them have commited acts of terrorism. If 99.999...% of people practicing Islam are peaceful, then Islam itself isn't a problem.

Do you think violence is a part of Islamic texts? Guess what, the Bible has plenty of acts of violence in it too. Times have changed and society, on the whole, has moved on from slavery and such.

Do you think Islamic countries are despotic? Guess what, athiest/non-Abrahamic countries (like Soviet Union) have commited lots of human rights crimes too. There are predominantly Christian countries in Africa which subjugate women and kill gay people. It happens on both sides, and at that point, it's not about the religion - it's about the people who practice it. Don't blame Islam (or any religious view for that matter)

Personal advice: Get out of your isolated cultural bubble and actually meet plenty of great people who have different religious beliefs than you. You'll realize that they're not diseased or violent at all and have more in common with you than you think.
Debate Round No. 1
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by AllenFierte 1 year ago
AllenFierte
So, let me get this straight. Pro has made a blanket statement with no evidence whatsoever to support his claim, while Con actually had a reasonably well thought out argument that was backed up by the First Amendment. If I could vote, Con would win hands down. Not even close.
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
I think the only thing that exist. Can be related to humans are humans. And the never ending dream of what it is. can be, and should be.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
islam is a religion.. all evil that exist is religion
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
Yes. But these concerns have not reacht "critical mass".. if they do not. The World could end up as an islamic state. Or pretty mutch as it is. If they do. It can end as it always does in similar situations.
Posted by sidah 1 year ago
sidah
The real concern is the islamisation of western countries. Not immigration per se but the adoption, tolerance and practice of islam infiltrating our legal system, our schools, more recently US Federal prisons (banning pork to cater for muslim population in jail) (!)m the adoption of sharia law in hosting countries. Don't expect the same courtesy to be extended to you or your children in an islamic country. Although islam is a minority in western countries, it has caused division, unrest, lack of peace wherever it goes. They have a very loud voice and won't back down. You don't need a degree to realise what will happen a islam increases in the west. Ban islam? Yes, it's not a religion, it's an ideology that is divisive, destructive, intolerant and will not assimilate into western culture. Time to stop tip toeing around the tulips and get it out in the open for debate.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
no just ban acceptance of criminal insanity..
Posted by canis 1 year ago
canis
I think you can not ban fear and hope. And the human ability to lie to it self.
Posted by vi_spex 1 year ago
vi_spex
people dont debate weather or not the coca label is red or green
Posted by KyronTheWise 1 year ago
KyronTheWise
If we are holding the idea that there is no debate, just truth as a factual statement, then why did you create a debate topic for it?

I mean, if there is no debate, it doesn't belong in the debate section. If there is, your statement is proven wrong. So which is it?

(Insert response that has nothing to do with my query whatsoever, and makes a poor attempt at imitating Eastern Philosophy platitudes here)
Posted by PointyDelta 1 year ago
PointyDelta
I can't vote, but Con destroyed Pro.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Brando97 1 year ago
Brando97
vi_spexCartTied
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 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: Pro didn't use any arguments, whereas Con used the Constitution. Con also argued that it was the people that were bad, not necessarily the belief system itself. My vote goes to Con.
Vote Placed by UtherPenguin 1 year ago
UtherPenguin
vi_spexCartTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con actually gave arguments. Pro only made a single claim followed by no arguments or evidence.
Vote Placed by AtkinsonCameron 1 year ago
AtkinsonCameron
vi_spexCartTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro just stated the debate topic and said nothing else. Con's spelling and grammar were far better and he made the convincing argument.
Vote Placed by YaHey 1 year ago
YaHey
vi_spexCartTied
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: Pro didn't even attempt to give an argument. They just stated their belief. Con didn't even have to make a response.