CreateDebate


Debate Info

63
49
Yes No
Debate Score:112
Arguments:80
Total Votes:127
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes (42)
 
 No (38)

Debate Creator

PungSviti(552) pic



Religion leeds to immoral behavior

Yes

Side Score: 63
VS.

No

Side Score: 49
2 points

You can justify any action with "religion."

"The bible says so", "God told me to", "Forgive me Jesus", et cetera.

Religious people have no inner strength, so they need to look outside themselves.

Side: yes
JakeJ(3255) Disputed
0 points

"You can justify any action with "religion." "

Not if it their religion doesn't encourage it, or is against it for that matter. You seem to be picking on Christianity, does being like Christ lead to immoral behavior?

Just because some psychopath says "God told me to", doesn't mean Christianity is to blame. I hope that for your sake you where just being a jerk picking on Christianity.

"Religious people have no inner strength"

What makes you think that?

Side: depends on the religion
jthm39(12) Disputed
2 points

The statement is that Religion leads to immoral behavior. Now that's open to so many damned interpretations its ridiculous. Ill specify what i think is fair. Religion = Organized doctrine that attempts to reach something which empirical data has not been able to. Immoral = Something that is the opposite of moral.

Morality is subjective, like how it is seen as normal to circumcise men in America, but we see it as disgusting that women in Ethiopia and other countries are being circumcised.

Were all a Western audience for the most part, and we all use Christianity as a basic grounds for argument, for and against our claims. People target Christianity just as much as Christians attempt to use argue its legitimacy.

Most religious books are so large, encompassing, and vague, that there are many interpretations that can be drawn. Christianity for example states that eating food from the sea that has no scales or fins is unclean, as is laying with another person who is the same sex as you. Unclean gets interpreted to mean sinful, then other scripture is interpreted to include the stoning of homosexuals.

The original claim is correct either way, and whoever posted this obviously did not want a specific conclusion. Of course religion leads to immoral behavior, but it also leads to moral behavior as well...so it is unfair to force people to decide.

"You can justify any action with religion", if the action is not justified, then you change the religion around. The Catholic Church was extremely good at that.

"Religious people have no inner strength." Arguable, but not strongly. Everyone has some degree of "inner strength". But I think that religious people have LESS inner strength than people who do not believe in organized religious doctrine.

Side: Radicalism leads to immoral behavior
1 point

you can't be immoral if you aren't first moral. =/

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Side: yes
1 point

Religious people have no inner strength that's why follow religions and priests and don't listen to their own conscience.

Side: yes
-1 points

95% of Prisoners are religious so this doesnt surprise me - what about you guys?

......................................................................................................

Religion leeds to immoral behavior
Side: yes
2 points

I've heard the argument from atheists before about the statistical difference between the number of non-believers on the street to the number of non-believers in the system, however this is the first time I've been informed of a scientific study of it. The fact that this is a study which covers numerous countries is encouraging, it lessens the chance of statistical anomalies.

In discussions with theists I'm often asked the question "If you don't have a set of rules to tell you what to do, why wouldn't you go out an steal, rape, and kill?" The fact that they can't comprehend basic ethics is astounding. I'm sure there must be non-ethical atheists out there (they must be, because there ARE atheists and non-theists in prison), but the atheists and non-theists that I know are all very cognisant of the fact that you catch more flies with honey than with vinegar.

I cannot speak for other religions, but within Christianity there is the overriding concept of forgiveness. Jesus will forgive you of your sins. And that's dangerous, because it says to people, "Sure, you can have that plasma TV you're thinking of hoisting, just remember to come back to church on Sunday so Jesus can forgive you again."

Side: yes
1 point

Yeah. My first guess would be that these get out hell free cards that churches pander and wave to simpletons as a discount for joining their team, so to speak; is what can indirectly cause, or at least breed the idea of (wrongfull) entitlement.

I think this sort of hive mentality is often prominent in wars (especially when religions are involved)

The catholic church then went even further and did not just give get out of hell free cards to child molestors within its establishment, but also did their best trying to keep them out of jail - even after numerous instances of criminal behavior, as if their buisness in airy fairy things, gave them jurisdiction in very dark and earthly matters. Having read the bible (for laughs) I would have to assume that their creeds are sure to damn them to Hell. Lucky for them that chances are it doesnt excist, but It would be fair for them to fear it for the rest of their lives - judging by their actions though, I doubt they will.

I think beleifs are natural, the world is to a huge extent chaotic and we have to make alot of bets (chance takings) in our live time. It helps to form accessions and beileifs for the game of life - but it also helps to be aware that entropy makes sure that nothing lasts, even our beileifs have an expiration date and it is healthy to newer stop searching and be aware of people who try to sell you on they claim that they have a better connection to the almighty then you have. They might have have big, show-offish buildings and garments but those are no less earthbound than your average MTV cribs.

The real lord, the only things that we cant escape from, that controls us, sustains us and that we cant argue away; are natural laws - but lucky for us that we can and have evolved to deal with those harsh laws better and better. And with moore´s law we are getting better and better processing and sensory equipment at an exponentially faster and faster rate. We need to stop living in worn out fantasy´s, for the power we are attaining at a constantly more rapid rate could be dangerous if we keep on approaching them with broken goggles feeding each other spins to further our "sanctimonious" incompateble splinters of thought habits (incompateble both to each other and nature)

Side: yes
brycer2012(1001) Disputed
1 point

Anyone can say that they are religious; they have to perform the actions of a religious person also. If they are out committing crimes then I don't think they're very religious.

Side: No
RevKristine(209) Disputed
3 points

Sorry Brycer, but this is what's called the "no true scotsman" argument. If someone identifies themselves as belonging to a religion, then they belong to that religion, whether they follow that religion well or not.

Side: yes
Kinda(1649) Disputed
1 point

A dinosaur paleontologist?

THAT's whose doing the study?

He's only found a correlation not a cause. BIG difference

Rich westernised democracies. It's liberalism that's the cause, not religion.

Fucking idiots. I can't believe you can't see the lack of logic, knowledge and rationale behind this. It amazes me.

Side: No
4 points

You forgot a few things.

For example:

A -How many prisoners accept the theory of evolution?

B -How many of the prisoners are democrats?

C -How many of the prisoners are not white?

D -How many of the prisoners are republicans?

E -How many of the prisoners believe in Global Warming?

F -How many prisoners believe in E.T.?

G -How many prisoners believe in Socialism?

H -How many prisoners believe in Abortion?

I -How many prisoners believe in Welfare?

J -How many prisoners believe in homosexuality?

K -How many prisoners believe in MSNBC?

L -How many prisoners are of average height?

M- How many prisoners are American citizens?

Damn, why don’t the producers of MSNBC realize we are not idiots.

Scientific study their ass!

Now, follow this formula:

New study links the theory of evolution to criminal behavior! (Derived from sample A)

(New study links idiocy to a paleontologist.)

Pardon my temporary insanity. Insanity does not invoke sanity.

Side: No
RevKristine(209) Disputed
3 points

"A dinosaur paleontologist?

THAT's whose doing the study?"

Actually, those were my first thoughts when I saw the article. I laughed a little. However, just because he's an expert in one particular area doesn't mean that he's not versed in the methodology of research in other areas, and specialising in one field doesn't mean it happens to be the only field he's interested in.

And yes, he has only found a correlation, not a cause. Finding causation would be something that would require a much broader study, and I admit that there is an enormous difference between the two. However I fail to see the correlation that you have made between liberalism and incarceration of people with religious beliefs. Please expand.

Side: yes
Akulakhan(2973) Disputed
1 point

You seem to have some grudge against liberals. You end up blaming them for strange things, even for the religious belief of inmates. I don't undetstand. Care to explain?

Side: Radicalism leads to immoral behavior

I agree with this. Look at all those stupid terrorists that think they are going to get 72 virgins? ;)

Side: yes
MKIced(2483) Disputed
1 point

A lot of prisoners go to jail and, while there, repent for their actions and find God. It's not the other way around. Therefore, wouldn't it be correct to say "Immoral behavior leads to religion,"?

Side: No
PungSviti(552) Disputed
1 point

well around 80% of released prisoners go back to jail within one or two years (cant remember which) so you might be right that immoral behavior sparks the incentive for people to seek forgiveness (get out of hell free cards - for joining a team) but it doesnt seem that their morality improves much

Side: yes
Sulith(508) Disputed
1 point

What is the world coming to?

That man was most likely Atheist of course he is going to blame Criminal Behavior on Religion!

Also, most prisoners convert to a religion while in Prison.

These people mess with their words to confuse the Idiots of America.

God just some times...

Side: No
2 points

Hitler hated Atheists and put more than a few into his concentration camps.

Side: yes
PungSviti(552) Disputed
0 points

I am wondering if having a picture of Hilter is just a joke

You know he is said to have been an atheist?

Side: yes
2 points

What is ironic is that the typical claim of the religious is that religion leads to immortal behavior.

However, co-relation is not causation. But the study warrants a deeper look into the issue.

Side: No
2 points

Religions often share the same basic moral code, which is something like 'do good and pray'. Radicalism is religion taken to an extreme in which moral codes are besided by forceful opression in attemt to end opposition or begin conversion.

See: the Crusades, the Taliban, Fox news

Side: Radicalism leads to immoral behavior
2 points

'religion leads to immoral behaviour.'

Despite everything i think about religion , i disagree with this statement.

Immoral people lead to immoral behaviour , not religion.

Side: No
izidor54(1) Disputed
2 points

Religion leads to immoral as well as unethical behaviour when it turns man against man. When religion demands intolerance towards other religions, or condemns others based upon their belief systems - and is even prepared to wage war and other forms of violence against others - then that is surely immoral behaviour. War and violence presuppose deliberate infliction of either injury and/or death. Such outcomes are surely the height of immorality as well as unethical behavior. Religions across time and space have much to answer for regards intolerance and violence in their own name - and that of their particular definitions of deity and truth.

Side: yes
PungSviti(552) Disputed
1 point

Would it make you happier if the statement where "immoral people tend to be more religious because it gives them a subterfuge for their immorality" ??

That statement is more specific at least.

What about "people lacking moral capital use religions as their fix" (fix in a drug sense) ??

Side: yes
dacey(1036) Disputed
1 point

Ooh tone of voice!

Well yes it would.

Hey dont think i dont know about how people hide behind religion.

Those immoral people.

And it certainly is a browny point according to every crim , i know.

Religion is one of the biggest scapegoats of all , for immoral behaviour.

I , infact find it hilarious that people (call me wacky) , will pray for forgiveness on their deathbed.

I find it repulsive that , people actually believe it will make a difference.

Proof it (religion) is immoral in itself.

I would actually go so far as to say that most religious folk , are bearing false witness!

Tell me of one single religion that has not .

Side: yes
1 point

Human nature leads to immoral behavior...

95% of inmates are religious? Many people who go to prison convert or become born again. So even if that figure is statistically significant (given that all conditions for a statistical find are right) it wouldn't matter much as to try and suggest that religion is what made these people commit crimes.

There are actually so many factors as to why inmates or criminals are religious that suggesting that religion is the cause of immoral behavior (which isn't illegal, by the way) is intellectually dishonest.

Side: No
PungSviti(552) Disputed
1 point

In my view "leeds to" doesnt mean "causes"

I dont think either that organized religions directly cause immoral (or moral) behvior. I just think that with the sanctity those establishments have aquired, they do provide subterfuge and attract people who would like to cloak their immorality with said sanctity - and therfore In another argument here somwhere I went through the history of how the catholic church tried to hide the crimes child molestors within their organisation to show how immorality can become institutionalized in these cults. I imagane the reasoning of those priests and high priests was "our religion is the high pillar of morality (as they all assume) and therfore a member of our cult cannot by defenition be immoral (even if he rapes over 100 kids) because he is part of our holy communion"

Side: yes
ThePyg(6743) Disputed
1 point

with the actual problems with the Vatican, saying that their cover ups are from a grandiose sense of being is kind of jumping the gun.

What is more likely is that the cover ups can just be for PR sakes. What they say is that they wish to deal with it the Catholic way. Catholicism is a religion of forgiveness, and if a priest is to commit a sin, he seeks forgiveness from his church. The Catholic church, despite people like Bill Donahue and jackholes like that, forgives those who truly repent. They believe that the sins a Holy Father commits is between him and God.

I believe, in all actuality, it has to do with both the policy of the church and PR. I think the Vatican is annoying and kind of stupid, but I don't really see them as evil as they once were. They, like all other ideologies, are blind.

But people seek some kind of justification or sanctuary from anything they can get their hands on. It's human nature. Sociopaths justify their misdeeds and they are usually far from religious. Secular Humanists will try to justify their own "sins" just as much as religious people will.

Side: No
1 point

This has got to be one of the stupidest things I've heard.

Religion does its best (and in general extremely well) to make people lead moral lives. Morality and religion live side by side. One cannot be without the other.

Just because people claim to be of a religion, but choose not to follow its rules - you cannot say religion is the cause of it.

Only retards believe that. Whoever voted yes is retarded.

Side: No
1 point

religion leads us to a moral behavior ....all the good things we learn from religion and from our tradition....it helps us to learn about faith,to respect others,and binds us with our ancestors and with our forefathers....those who think that religion leads to immoral behavior this is because they are born immoral....

Side: No
1 point

It depends on the "religion".

Let's look at Christianity for example.

Christians generally have better morals because of their religion. That doesn't mean every Christian has good morals hence "nobody is perfect" we accept that. We all sin. (and it doesn't mean atheists have bad morals or are bad people so calm down)

People do all sorts of bad things, and if they are "Christian" that means they aren't truly being Christian. It happens all the time and religion is not to blame. It's happening despite their religion.

Christianity doesn't change, people do. And Christianity doesn't promote things that are immoral to our society therefore Christianity isn't to blame for any immoral behavior.

Now if it's a religion that says "go kill people", then yes. That religion would lead to immoral behavior.

Side: depends on the religion
2 points

While I come down on the same side of the debate as you, I disagree with virtually everything you said.

First of all, your notion that Christians generally have better morals. I strongly doubt that you have any support for that statement and frankly your caveat that that doesn't mean that Atheists are bad people doesn't carry much weight since your argument is that Christians are better.

Your statement that Christians doing bad things are not truly Christians (or are not being Christian) is a self-serving argument that is known as the Scotsman fallacy. (All Scotsmen wear kilts and eat haggis. My Uncle Angus doesn't do either. Then he's not a true Scotsman). It's an argument that can be used on any group to support anything, and it is utterly meaningless.

I agree that that Christianity should not be blamed for every evil act that is done in its name, but neither can it be absolved in every instance. The Southern branches of Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian and Episcopal churches (as well as others) all came into existence through schisms over the issue of slavery and those churches found plenty of scriptural support for their position. You can argue that they misinterpreted the Scripture, and that’s fine, but the fact remains that in the area of the country that was (and continues to be) the stronghold of American Christianity, millions of passionate committed Christians lacked the moral compass to identify and oppose one greatest evils in American history.

And it didn’t stop there, these same churches, and the decedents of these same Christians championed Jim Crow and segregation and bitterly opposed integration and Civil Rights for more than a century after the Civil War. It was only a few years ago that one of these churches, the Southern Baptists, admitted that they were wrong.

Yes, there were Christians in the North who were on the other sides of these issues and we should give credit to the Christians and churches that fought slavery and segregation, but Christianity itself cannot be absolved for its part in the evil, the condoning of evil, or the ignoring of evil in this case.

Side: No

No, that's way too general a statement, even when it's spelled correctly. Religion certainly has been causal to some of the most horrendous immoral acts in history, but so too has politics, philosophy and greed and none of those things (even greed) necessarily lead to immoral behavior.

Religion is very often used in an attempt to excuse or justify immoral behavior, but there again, so are a lot of other things.

Side: No

Basically, the Proposition keeps arguing that religions are immoral. But fundamentally, what you deem immoral may be considered moral. So, it is ultimately not for you to determine what's moral, and what's immoral. So what you have said makes no sense.

Side: No