The Instigator
brooke_bowen
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points
The Contender
MTGandP
Pro (for)
Winning
36 Points

should religion be based on the parents wants?

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 8 votes the winner is...
MTGandP
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/7/2009 Category: Religion
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,723 times Debate No: 10369
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (6)
Votes (8)

 

brooke_bowen

Con

my father grew up in a catholic home and did not follow the customs as you would call it. and did not think that there customs were all correct as you would call it and for those who do not know catholic traditions some follow as:

*no sexual contact which involve masturbation UNLESS you are married to the opposite sex
*homosexuality is not allowed
*when you have committed a sin you must tell "the father" confessions

first off they say no masturbation so when a little boy starts puberty,that means he cant touch him self you have to control the urges you have from touching your penis.

also if either a boy or girl had got raped and they obviously was not married does that mean the family dis owns them cause they did not follow the tradition's?

homosexuality can cause a whole other debate but the main points is that my father married my mother and she is in fact bisexual and you should not judge somebody because of there sexual orientation

correct me if I'm wrong but each day somebody commits a sin either its small or big but each day somebody gossips about somebody it could either be good or bad but the point is you had gossiped about somebody and you have not told them about it so in other words you will be in conffesion everyday

so my conclusion comes to you should let children choose there own religion
MTGandP

Pro

I welcome my opponent to DDO. I remind the reader that this is my first debate in about four months, so I'm a little rusty. But I'll do what I can. Let's hope that Con goes easy on me.

My opponent is arguing that children should be allowed to decide their own religious orientation. I disagree, and affirm the resolution: a child's religion should be based on the wants of the parents.

My opponent's only argument is that there are some supposedly irrational Catholic practices. However, she has failed to prove the irrationality of these practices, and has failed to make the connection between her arguments and the resolution. Her arguments so far are completely baseless. In addition, some of her arguments are just wrong. Masturbation is a sin (http://www.gotquestions.org...), as is homosexuality (http://godhatesfags.com...). Besides, there is only one True Religion, so why bother choosing a different one?

Contention 1: Children are not of sound mind. Young children are well-known to have limited reasoning abilities (http://en.wikipedia.org...), and even teenagers are known for their rebellious and less-than-rational tendencies. Therefore, these people should not be left out in the cold; parents should help them choose a religion.

Contention 2: Children have a duty to their parents. If it weren't for the parents, those children would not exist in the world. Only because of the nurturing and caring of the parents can the children survive at all. I think a child owes it to her parents to follow their religion.

Conclusion: My opponent has failed to make any real arguments. I have made two. Vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 1
brooke_bowen

Con

my opponent has very little to say his own oppinion so let me say it like this
in some countries the family beliefs are that the parents are to choose who the child is to marry so i ask you agree to this? so you say love has nothing to do with a relationship? but are thou shall have sex with a married spouse and in love?
also in some religions like mulisim they are not allowed to eat meat so what if they was to say to marry a diffrent religion that are allowed to eat meat and say perhaps they get married have sexual intercourse and make children. how are there kids sopose to grow up? you expect them to follow two diffrent religions? HOW? when one relegion is allowed to eat meat and the other is not so what you going to tell your kids?
"no kids you cant eat meat today on the behalf of your fathers religion"
lets speak logically here for a minnute. how can you teach a ten year old that you cant eat out at mcdonalds or burger king cause of "meat" while his\her freinds have
MTGandP

Pro

I cannot honestly say that I entirely understand my opponent's arguments. Her talk about whether love has something to do with a relationship hardly seems relevant to the debate at hand. My opponent also seems to be proposing that vegetarianism is somehow wrong. There is nothing morally corrupt about vegetarianism, as my opponent suggests; in fact, it is a very healthy lifestyle (http://news.bbc.co.uk...). My opponent also implies that a ten-year old should eat at McDonald's because all of his or her friends do. I think it is clear enough why this is wrong. I'm sure that we have all many times heard the old, "if all your friends jumped off of a cliff, would you do it too?" McDonald's is really not so different from jumping off a cliff (http://en.wikipedia.org...).

My opponent has in no way responded to my arguments. They are thus far completely unrefuted. Therefore, there is nothing more that I can say.
Debate Round No. 2
brooke_bowen

Con

ok my opponent's profile it states that he is "atheist" so let me ask you this...... are your parents this same religion? i am no one to judge about what you believe in but let me say this did you pick your own beliefs not to believe there is no god nor heaven or the belif in the devil or hell.... so how is this diffrent from my statement? please let me know
MTGandP

Pro

My opponent seems to have conceded nearly all arguments.

Both of my parents are, in fact, atheists. My opponent has therefore failed to prove that my religion differs from my parents'. Her entire syllogism has thus collapsed; not only has she conceded many arguments, but the very basis of her position is no longer tenable. The choice is clear: vote Pro.
Debate Round No. 3
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by omelet 7 years ago
omelet
Vote
===
Agree with before: CON
Agree with after: CON
Conduct: TIE
Spelling and Grammar: PRO
Convincing Arguments: PRO
Reliable Sources: TIE

RFD
===
The first two categories do not give points. I happen to disagree with the resolution, and that's why I voted CON.

Neither participant had particularly bad conduct, so I voted that it was a tie.

CON did not use proper punctuation or capitalization, and sentence structure was often incorrect, so PRO won spelling and grammar.

CON almost had a fairly good point when it came to parents of two different religions, but she devolved that argument into something with far less impact and didn't really press the point in the following round. PRO put his points slightly better, but I still found the points rather weak. Neither participant did a great job of addressing the opposition's points, though PRO did explicitly state that CON's point was confusing and CON failed to even try to clarify the following round. Overall, I think PRO argued better, and thus voted for him.

While PRO used many outside sources, they were often used to show a point that was completely irrelevant, and it seemed he was simply citing sources because points are awarded for sources. Sources were not used well enough for me to award points in this category.
Posted by mattrodstrom 7 years ago
mattrodstrom
lol. 14 pts.

I've had three debates where I wrote pages, and actually had arguments, and I don't think I got 14 pts.
Posted by brooke_bowen 7 years ago
brooke_bowen
the pro has literly given himself points on his own!!!! should this be labeled as cheating? who should really win?
Posted by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
Argree BF: Con
Agree AF: Con
Conduct: Tie
Spelling/Grammar: Pro
Arguments: Pro
Sources: Pro
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
Con has unjustifiably given herself seven points.
Posted by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
RFD

B/A: Con/Con
Conduct: Tie.
S&G: Pro - Con had some capitalization issues, and had some sentences that didn't really make sense.
Args: Pro - Obviously.
Sources: Pro - Pro had several, Con had none.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by dogparktom 7 years ago
dogparktom
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by Mixer 7 years ago
Mixer
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by omelet 7 years ago
omelet
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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:04 
Vote Placed by brooke_bowen 7 years ago
brooke_bowen
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by Korashk 7 years ago
Korashk
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by GeorgeCarlinWorshipper 7 years ago
GeorgeCarlinWorshipper
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by atheistman 7 years ago
atheistman
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by MTGandP 7 years ago
MTGandP
brooke_bowenMTGandPTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06