The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
spencbeth2
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

reliable source=religion=unknown

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 3 votes the winner is...
spencbeth2
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/14/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 174 times Debate No: 93721
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

vi_spex

Pro

religion=to rely on, while self is one
spencbeth2

Con

Although what you are saying is... Broken. I will try to decipher what you are trying to say.

It looks like you are trying to say religion itself you can rely on, as a reliable source.

First we have to analyze what makes a reliable source.
Credibility in a source is proven through 2 things:
Education of author
Experience

And then the variables of credibility are the bias of the author (a Democrat praising Hillary)

With this said religion itself is not credible due to the fact that the author of many religions, has not actually been proven real.
Whereas if they may be real, they may have a lot of experience, but they have just not been proven real.
Religion is based of faith and belief, which i categorize opinions with. Therefore religion is not a reliable source.
Debate Round No. 1
vi_spex

Pro

you can rely on any claim
spencbeth2

Con

Unfortunately, you can rely on any claim. But this world would be chaos if we did.

If a random man told Obama to nuke the Middle East, should he rely on his claim? Probably not.
Debate Round No. 2
vi_spex

Pro

religion is wrong
spencbeth2

Con

Yet another baseless opinion that could actually be fallacious at the root.

If you want to debate I suggest you stay on topic rather than spurting random nonsense out of your mouth.

Thank you for the debate.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by zmikecuber 7 months ago
zmikecuber
vi_spexspencbeth2Tied
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 didn't make any sense.
Vote Placed by Conservatism 7 months ago
Conservatism
vi_spexspencbeth2Tied
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: Conduct: There were no insults directed to either contender. S&G The Pro did not capitalize, or place a period in any of his statements. Con did. Convincing arguments?: There were no logical arguments offered from the Pro that had an explanation to them except it being a simple statement. The Con had an explanation for his arguments. Sources? Tie. Neither gave sources.
Vote Placed by Bored_Debater 7 months ago
Bored_Debater
vi_spexspencbeth2Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con explains how religious sources (bible) is not a credible source, pro then admits that religion is wrong. Essentially agreeing with con that religious sources are not credible. Therefore, point goes to con. I can't really understand where vi_spex was trying to say in round 1. Con was easy to understand. Therefore, point goes to con.