The Instigator
Julian-Artuphays
Con (against)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
famousdebater
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points

is the world will be better 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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 5 votes the winner is...
famousdebater
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/10/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,168 times Debate No: 84809
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (25)
Votes (5)

 

Julian-Artuphays

Con

Is the world will be better without religion? We are not talking about Christianity, Islam, Buddha, Hindu, or anything. Its all about is the world will be better if everyone doesn't follow any rules from any religion? In this position, I support religion.
famousdebater

Pro

I accept. I propse that the Burden of Proof is shared since my opponent will need to prove that religion is good and I will need to prove reliigion is bad. I will allow my opponent to define their case and begin their arguments in the next round. In order to keep the debate fair in terms of rounds, I will refrain from posting arguments in this round.
Debate Round No. 1
Julian-Artuphays

Con

I though the Burden of Proof is on you. Because we already facing the fact, that life we lived at this time affect by the existence of religion. And you need to give your proof that life would be better without it. Then how you can be very sure of the circumstances that exist in your imagination, that life would be better without religion? Religion doesn't kill people, but politics is. Even if there is no religion, politics still exist (maybe). And everyone knows, politics is cruel. Some people make a religion as a political shield. Without religion, death rates doesn"t decrease. Religion gives people every reason to live. religious people would be mutually keep life together. Because murdering is the greatest sin. Only partly political control distort religious interpretations.

Not only kill people, but suicides are also a great sin. According to the theology of the Roman Catholic Church, suicide is objectively a sin which violates the commandment "Thou shalt not kill". Islam views suicide as one of the greatest sins and utterly detrimental to one's spiritual journey. A verse in the Quran instructs; "And do not kill yourselves, surely God is most Merciful to you." (Qur'an, Sura An-Nisa 4:29). Most Muslim scholars and clerics consider suicide forbidden and similarly include suicide bombing as being equally forbidden. So, no religion support killing. In more religious countries, we got lower suicide rates.

http://www.gallup.com...

Therefore, religion is not dangerous, but politics is.

America, Oil, and War in the Middle East (http://jah.oxfordjournals.org...)
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
https://en.wikipedia.org...
famousdebater

Pro

Terrorism in Islam


There are many terrorist organisations (TO) that have killed many people in the name of their religion. ISIS Has Killed More Than 10,000 [1]. ISIS acts in the name of Islam [2] The Quran states that apostasy is an act worthy of the death [3] The Quran promotes gender inequality (GI) [4]


The Quran:


“Your women are your fields, so go into your fields whichever way you like” [5]


This refers to women as objects in which men can do whatever they like to, this is GI which also encourages rape which is an act of terrorism [6]


The Quran:

“Wives have the same rights as the husbands have on them in accordance with the generally known principles. Of course, men are a degree above them in status” [5]


This is GI.

Terrorism in Christianity


The KKK is a notable TO. They believe in white supremacy and death to blacks [7], murder is an act of TO and attempting mass genocide [8] is especially considered to be terrorism as a result of religion [9]


The Bible:

“ [he] was walking along the road, some boys came out of the town and jeered at him. “Get out of here, baldy!” ... [he] called down a curse on them in the name of the Lord. Then two bears came out of the woods and mauled forty-two of the boys.” 2 Kings 2:23-25 NIV [10]


God believes that killing 42 boys is moral.
If his actions are perfect [11] then the Bible states that infanticide is moral as God has done it and God is a moral source.


War


People have spent their lives fighting religious. The 80 year war is arguably the biggest war caused by religion:


“Eighty Years’ War is also known as independent war of Dutch and it was fought from 1568 to 1648 ... The key reason behind this 80 years long war was that Spain emperors implemented different religious rules in the entire Spanish dynasty ...” [12]


4 births occur per second [13] many people were born at the start of this war and would have had to fight it all of their lives - it was 80 years long! The LE at the time was 49 yrs [14] This is religion! [15]


Sources in comments
Debate Round No. 2
Julian-Artuphays

Con

|sources in comment|

GENDER INEQUALITY

Islamic system is not gender equality, but equal rights. Woman belong to her husband & man belong to his mother. A woman express love in terms of surrender, trust, and empowers her husband by accepting his leadership, and by believing in him. Women have a right to be protected, while men have a duty to protect. Women doesn’t have equal strength with men. Women will pregnant, women will menstruate, while men do not. It can’t be equal, because women and men are here to complete each other. Although there is no gender equality, but men and women have equal rights to live. You can’t mix football team with male and female. Please don’t use your logic errors.

RELIGION, WAR, & POLITICS
“... The key reason behind this 80 years long war was that Spain emperors implemented different religious rules in the entire Spanish Dynasty ...”

I already told you, war and terrorism is not caused by religion but politics inside the religion. Sometimes they twist the meaning of the holly book to support their political ideology. You still didn’t get it? I wish you want to read more about religion. Your knowledge about that are not comprehensive.

You said that religion are dangerous, and you want to eliminate all religion? You are dangerous! Its about my side against your side. If my side are religion, and you think your side is secular (as listed in your profile), I guess you got the wrong definition. Secular is not Atheism, but a system with multiple religions. You starting a case with something not scientific, not historical, and non-sense. You will easily found some religious people who has modesty, as easy to find people who claim that they are atheist with insolency, who humiliate the religious people as a fool who believes in fairy tales. But realize it, Religion is born to suppress the attitude of arrogant, selfish, and overly confident. Religion teach you how to helps each other. And of course, life wouldn't be better without Religion.
famousdebater

Pro

famousdebater forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
25 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Yassine// Mod action: NOT Removed<

1 points to Con (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro forfeited. Plus, Pro mentioned plagiarism after his forfeiture, it doesn't count against Con. => Con's win.

[*Reason for non-removal] A forfeit is sufficient reason to award conduct. It is not up to the moderator to decide whether or not plagiarism occurred, and the voter may assess it however they wish.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: UtherPenguin// Mod action: NOT Removed<

1 point to Con (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: forfeiture

[*Reason for non-removal*] A forfeit is sufficient reason to award conduct. It is not up to the moderator to decide whether or not plagiarism occurred, and the voter may assess it however they wish.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Dpowell// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture.

[*Reason for removal*] While a forfeit justifies conduct, it is insufficient for justifying any of these other point allocations.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
Dpowell, while I wont chime in on the question of whether or not plagiarism took place in this debate, the presence of a forfeit does not indicate an automatic loss. Pro did not concede the debate as a whole by failing to post in the final round. So when you post a full 7 points to Con for the forfeit alone as you've done, that would not only be insufficient, but a vote bomb as well. Treat this as a heads up, because I have no doubt it will be reported.
Posted by Dpowell 1 year ago
Dpowell
Plagiarism was, at no time, mentioned in the debate. Also, there is no evidence of Con plagiarizing anything. I looked through his sources, he didn't plagiarize anything. Pro is just trolling and/or trying to steal votes away from Con to hide the fact that he forfeited and lost by default.
Posted by Dpowell 1 year ago
Dpowell
Pro can't win this. By default, he lost. He forfeited therefore any and all votes going to him are unfair and should be invalid.
Posted by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
But he wrote NONE of that.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Forever23// Mod action: NOT Removed<

6 points to Pro (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: PLAGIARISM WILL NEVER BE TOLERATED

[*Reason for non-removal] There are no specific standards when it comes to assessing plagiarism. Also, since plagiarism is a more basic violation of the rules of the site, the issue of whether or not it's brought up in the substance of the debate is up to the voter to decide.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: tajshar2k// Mod action: NOT Removed<

6 points to Pro (Conduct, Arguments, Sources). Reasons for voting decision: Con plagarized.

[*Reason for non-removal*] There are no specific standards when it comes to assessing plagiarism. Also, since plagiarism is a more basic violation of the rules of the site, the issue of whether or not it's brought up in the substance of the debate is up to the voter to decide.
************************************************************************
Posted by ssadi 1 year ago
ssadi
And no, it doesn't make it permissible.. It just doesn't make it your argument or counter argument within the debate, what voters vote for.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by UtherPenguin 1 year ago
UtherPenguin
Julian-ArtuphaysfamousdebaterTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeiture
Vote Placed by Yassine 1 year ago
Yassine
Julian-ArtuphaysfamousdebaterTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct: Pro forfeited. Plus, Pro mentioned plagiarism after his forfeiture, it doesn't count against Con. => Con's win.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 1 year ago
dsjpk5
Julian-ArtuphaysfamousdebaterTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro ff a round, but Con plagiarized, so conduct is a tie.
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 1 year ago
tajshar2k
Julian-ArtuphaysfamousdebaterTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Con plagarized.
Vote Placed by Forever23 1 year ago
Forever23
Julian-ArtuphaysfamousdebaterTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: PLAGIARISM WILL NEVER BE TOLERATED