The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

is terrorism just another word for acts based on unjustified beliefs

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/23/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 572 times Debate No: 68777
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)




It is clear to me that the word terrorism is just a word to describe...of actually mask the actual case.....which is people acting apon unjustified beliefs.....why dont we just call it what it really is? And most of the time that unjustified belief is religion. These people are not trying to cause terror they think they are acting in a productive manner and in gods interests . Lets face it


I'm assuming, based on Pro's entry, that the first round should include arguments, so I'll start this round.
Good luck to my opponent! I'm hoping for an interesting debate.

I believe this is a classic case of, "All squares are rectangles, but not all rectangles are squares." Which is to say, I believe that terrorism is a subcategory of acts based on unjustified beliefs, but not a description of the whole group.

I'll explain this in practical terms. I'm Jewish, and so I pray thrice daily. This is an action which, atheists would believe, is unjustified, as it conforms in their minds to the definition of unjustified: "not shown to be right or reasonable." Would atheists call me a terrorist, just because I pray?

In short, terrorism is a subcategory, not a synonym, for acts based on unjustified beliefs.
Debate Round No. 1


This is my first post so bear with me if you can....but i guess my point is.......there are many many many unjustified beliefs and many actions based on them. The actions may or may not produce negative results. When they have no negative impact on society or humanity or lets just say the united states for the sake of this argument, its pretty much unnoticed and doesnt really matter....but when tbe result of an action based on an unjustified belief does negatively impact the country such as blowing people up chopping off heads it is given tbe label or terrorism....the problem isnt the result of tbe is tbe process used in the decision making to perform the said action....that process being, using unjustified beliefs to adrive at said decision....i could just as easily call the crusades Terrorists and ignore their motives or even congress terrorists for making policy decisions based on their unjustified beliefs that impact the world negatively.....these labels give people a ....detour or distraction from the root of the problem......if the majority of decisions were based on the maximum amount of factual data a huge majority of the worlds issues would not long story short...calling acts based on religion that happen to be harmul terrorism ignores the actual problem......i submit to grammer and spelling


Few things:
1: The crusaders were terrorists. Everyone learns about their exploits in the Holy Land, not stopping to realize that they killed tens of thousands, maybe even more than one-hundred thousand, Jews who lived Europe. They also destroyed countless synagouges and burnt books of Jewish law. So, yes, the crusaders were terrorists, plain and simple.
2: I feel that you are backtracking. You, as pro, say that Terrorism and acts based on unjustified beliefs are synonymous. But then, you state that some acts based on unjustified beliefs aren't terrorism, as they cause no harm. I feel that your resolution is too broad for it to be embodied completely by your opinion.
3: Justification is in the eye of the beholder. You can't just use the word unjustified as objective.
Good luck in the next round.
Debate Round No. 2


My argument is that calling them terrorists takes away from what they really are...individuals who are acting reasonable and justifiably according to their religion...their intent is not to cause terror ....their actions lead to terror for others but it is not their goal......ic we are gonna label people based on a result even if it wasnt tbe intent why dont we jusg call butchers terrorists since they cause terror in cows...even though its not their goal...we need to label things and situations accurately as to understand what we are dealing with in an attempt to fix it at tbe root of tbe issue.....thanks for the vote of luck tbat was. Ery generous of you but not necassary......


"My argument is that calling them terrorists takes away from what they really are."
Actually, your argument as defined by the statement is: "Terrorism just another word for acts based on unjustified beliefs."

Until now, I haven't really heard any proofs that these two phrases are synonymous. Rather, you've explained how we need to relabel terrorism, to say it like it is. I do believe that an act of terrorism is an act of unjustified belief, no matter who commits it. But not all acts of unjustified belief are terrorism.

I hope to read some interesting, on-topic arguments next round.
Debate Round No. 3


I guess my title was not should have said terrorst is the wrong label for people who act based on their rediculous religious beliefs


First off: please leave religion out of it. Their are other groups who commit terrorist attacks. In fact, Italy greatest civilian attack was done by Neo-Fascists, not members of any specific religion.

Secondly, ridiculousness is in the eye of the beholder.

And fiinally, our debate is about the title of the debate. But their are probably many sources you can find who argue your opinion, so all is not lost for you in this debate.

Good luck next round.
Debate Round No. 4

Pro i wontvleave religion out of it...the are one of the biggest offenders.....and i already told you the titke misrepresented what i meant but the entire oint was lost on you ....i hooe people read this and actually understqnd what is being said.....f


Fine, don't leave religion out of it. Religion is a very major point in terrorist attacks. But it's not the only point.

I know the title misrepresented what you meant. However, people vote based on the official opinions as defined by the title, not by the opinions stated thereafter.

I also hope people read this and understand our discussion. Voters, I want you to realize that Terrorism is only a sub-category of acts based on unjustified belief. I want you to realize that spelling and grammar are the icing to the cake, and the fact that my opponent clearly wrote arguments quickly on a mobile device doesn't display a recognition of that. And I want you to realize that the debate topic is what is voted upon, and a debater's change of opinion during the debate means that they have veritably given up on their original belief.

Thank You, and have a good night.
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by bat9581 2 years ago
I agree with pro.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
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 Checkmark-1 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 had terrible spleleleling. Con showed terrorism cannot be considered a synonym for unjustified beliefs, since it is a subset.