The Instigator
debata
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points
The Contender
induced
Pro (for)
Losing
3 Points

mocking religion is acceptable

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 3 votes the winner is...
debata
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/28/2013 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,539 times Debate No: 31797
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

debata

Con

I personally don't believe that it is acceptable to mock religion on a personal level, because people are entitled to believe whatever they like. I think that when religion becomes involved in wider issues such as education and politics, mockery should be shunned in favour of reasonable debate.
induced

Pro

"people are entitled to believe whatever they like"
mocking religions or religious beliefs doesnt force anyone to not believe in their religion. if you're entitiled to beliefs, then you're entitled to your negative views on religion, so why not speak your mind? there are even religious scriptures that mock infidels for their religious beliefs or lack thereof

"mockery should be shunned in favour of reasonable debate."
why cant you do both? i have reasonable debates all the time with people on religion. why cant i also point out and laugh at a belief that i find funny and ridiculous? is it disrespectful? yes, but so what? why should we respect all religious beliefs when many are false, harmful, and encourage bad things? for instance, why should i respect the KKK or Nazi's?
Debate Round No. 1
debata

Con

"people are entitled to believe whatever they like" "mockery should be shunned in favour of reasonable debate"

The issue isn't a case of whether one should question elements of a belief system such as religion, because I believe that questions should be constantly asked about any belief system, in the same way that science constantly questions itself. The issue is that when approaching a topic as personal as a religious belief system, it should be done with a certain amount of respect, and mockery is rarely the best way in my opinion. I would like to think that, debating in a rational democratic society populated by free thinkers, we would treat each others beliefs, however bizarre they may seem, with that basic decency of respect, whether that be on YouTube comments, or in parliament.

I am not talking about religious or political extremism, which I think is different. By this I mean when a belief system becomes militarized. By this point reasonable debate has long been forgotten in favor of force, so the situation must obviously be approached differently, but not necessarily disrespectfully. Perhaps what happens at that point is a whole different debate, but also I wonder how many times people treating each others beliefs disrespectfully has been the cause of wars and atrocities. Indeed the KKK or the Nazi's are organisations with disdain for other belief systems at the core of their principles.

Also I am not saying that we must treat every topic with the utmost sincerity and discuss every single matter completely po-faced and humourless. Of course we can laugh at everything, that's something comedy is great for, breaking down barriers, starting discussions encouraging progressive debate. Again the issue is that there is a certain amount of sensitivity required when dealing with laughing at something as personal as religion. Comedians can be as extreme as they want, but you can choose whether or not you laugh, or even watch them in the first place, so they have their place in healthy debate in the same way music and art do.
induced

Pro

"I wonder how many times people treating each others beliefs disrespectfully has been the cause of wars and atrocities."
many bad things have happened as a result of respecting beliefs. if people who talked to hitler before his rise to power would have put him in his place, instead of respecting his beliefs, then maybe the holocaust and WW2 wouldnt have happened. im not saying we should kill all religious people, im saying what is so horrible about just mocking something that is ridiculous?

"Of course we can laugh at everything"..."a certain amount of sensitivity required when dealing with laughing at something as personal as religion"..."Comedians can be as extreme as they want"
im confused, you think that it is acceptable to mock religion, but only if you're a comedian? what difference does it make? isnt everyone a comedian more or less?
why would a religious person be so sensitive about their beliefs? it sounds like the unhealthy thing there is the belief, not the insensitive mocking of their belief.
if someone mocks my beliefs, then if they have a good point, i will laugh at myself and maybe rethink those beliefs, and if they dont have a good point, then i will laugh at them and be even more convinced that those beliefs are true. it is a win-win situation. why should i feel threatened?
if you mock a belief that makes perfect sense, then it only makes the mocker look bad, so it's not like they are hurting anyone but themself. on the other hand, if you mock a belief that is completely ridiculous, then it should be mocked and disrespected, because of how anti-intellectual it is, until it can prove that it should be taken seriously.
Debate Round No. 2
debata

Con

" if you mock a belief that is completely ridiculous, then it should be mocked and disrespected"
Surely this is entirely subjective, since what is deemed ridiculous can be totally different from one person/culture to the next.
Who has the right to decide what is ridiculous and what isn't, and is it only then seen as acceptable to mock things that a majority of the population deem ridiculous? for example the american family who were the subject of the "god hates f*gs" documentary. This is a family who see fit within their beliefs to turn up at soldiers funerals chanting intentionally offensive mockeries during times of family grief and mourning. You could say they are they well within their rights to make a mockery of what they see as ridiculous? I'm not a big fan of that notion.

"if you mock a belief that makes perfect sense, then it only makes the mocker look bad"
I would say it depends a lot on the type of mockery, and what exactly the mockery is. The reason it is more acceptable for a comedian to mock religion is that it is a comedians job to mock everything, and so if they didn't mock religion it would be strange. Therefore, I would be a lot less shocked if a comedian resorted to mockery during a stand up routine, than say if a reknowned intellectual resorted to mockery in a debate with a theist. Its all about context, and its obviously a fine line.

"if someone mocks my beliefs, then if they have a good point, i will laugh at myself and maybe rethink those beliefs".
I understand that you personally probably have a healthy appetite for debate and see mockery in a rather constructive way. I also think that many people's first reaction to someone mocking their deeply held beliefs is indignance, which often doesn't make for progressive debate. I am not personally religious, and have had debates with theists many times over the years, often very frustrating! We must remember that in some cases, we are talking about a religious way of life which has been handed down through generations of family, and probably hasn't been questioned in generations. Again this goes back to the reasons why it is important to approach with respect.
induced

Pro

if by "mocking religion", you mean trying to make religious people miserable for your own enjoyment, then yes mocking religion is bad. but i think of "mocking religion" as more like teasing a friend. i have heard people tease me for my beliefs, and i dont have a problem with laughing along. if you do have a problem laughing at yourself, then you should lighten up. people can be offended by just about anything, but it is their own fault for being over-sensitive. we cant always be bending over backwards to avoid offending over-sensitive people. there are people offended by women who dont wear full body coverings, and other people offended by women who DO wear full body coverings. there are people offended by almost anything, and that is their own fault.


"We must remember that in some cases, we are talking about a religious way of life which has been handed down through generations of family, and probably hasn't been questioned in generations. Again this goes back to the reasons why it is important to approach with respect."
so what if it hasnt been questioned? even more reason to mock it. if someone is extremely bothered by someone mocking their beliefs, then they are an intolerant person and they are the one who needs to correct their behavior
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Mysterious_Stranger 4 years ago
Mysterious_Stranger
Mocking anything directly is always wrong, however questioning Religion is right if you do not believe in it.
Posted by debata 4 years ago
debata
i'm referring to the fact that many atheists see religious people as fair game to make fun of. Is this something should be accepted from a social aspect? In terms of legality, I think that would only really apply if the mockery was taken to the extreme where it becomes harrasment.
Posted by wildcard173 4 years ago
wildcard173
What do you mean by "acceptable?" Do you mean in a legal way or from a social aspect?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by LibertarianWithAVoice 4 years ago
LibertarianWithAVoice
debatainducedTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't see why anyone would believe this is morally acceptable.
Vote Placed by KingDebater 4 years ago
KingDebater
debatainducedTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Spelling and grammar to Con for Pro's lack of punctuation. Arguments to Pro because the resolution was "Mocking religion is acceptable", and pro made a point that was not properly refuted, that for example, he shouldn't be expected to respect groups such as the Nazis or the KKK.
Vote Placed by Daktoria 4 years ago
Daktoria
debatainducedTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro makes an unjustified intuitive leap from beliefs to speech. He fails to recognize how freedom of speech can violate freedom of assembly in terms of duress, and carries on this tangent. Note that this has nothing to do with religion either. It pertains in general. Con even notes this in terms of "respect" and what's "ridiculous". Pro fails to grasp the boundaries of "teasing" and blames the victim for being over-sensitive which is insulting.