CreateDebate


Debate Info

21
27
They should coincide They should be seperate
Debate Score:48
Arguments:53
Total Votes:50
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 They should coincide (19)
 
 They should be seperate (18)

Debate Creator

FrankRagazzo(5) pic



Should religion and government be seperate?

This is a very big debate and I would really like to see a debate on this.  I also have this for a school debate and would like some of your answers to get ideas for my own debate.

They should coincide

Side Score: 21
VS.

They should be seperate

Side Score: 27
1 point

What about the atheist .......... When Christopher Hitchens observes that .. “Religion is violent .. irrational .. intolerant .. allied to racism and tribalism and bigotry .. invested in ignorance and hostile to free inquiry .. contemptuous of women and coercive toward children" .. he is both right and wrong . . . . . Hitchens is right because humankind is sinful and selfish .. Indeed .. I believe it was G.K. Chesterton who said that the one Christian doctrine that was demonstrably provable .. even to casual observers .. was the sinfulness and depravity of man .. Thus .. human expressions of the religious impulse will inevitably produce some religious practices and beliefs that would fit Hitchens’ rather grim description . . . . Human history is replete with such flawed expressions of religious faith

.

However . . this would be true of all secular philosophies and ideologies as well .. Three of the most heinous and barbaric ideologies .. which produced the greatest cruelties and violations of humanity in the 20th century .. were fascism .. Nazism and communism . . . . all secular (atheist based ideologies)

.

Hitchens is wrong in that he condemns all religious expression to the category of such violent and negative expressions . . . Many of the noblest expressions of humanity throughout the centuries have been performed in the name of religion . . . One thinks of William Wilberforce and his long campaign to end the slave trade in the British Empire . . . Both the British and American abolitionist movements were founded .. nurtured .. financed and led to victory against the horrific evil of slavery by people who were most often inspired and motivated by deep religious conviction

.

The great social reform movements of the last half of the 19th and the first half of the 20th century ( child labor reform .. etc ) were often led by people of deep religious faith .. Protestant and Catholic

.

And of course .. in the lifetime of many of us who were born in the last half of the 20th century .. the most successful and greatest reform movement was the civil rights revolution .. led by a Baptist minister .. Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr .. who often said that the movement and the faith that inspired it could not be separated . . . As many will remember .. the civil rights revolution was supported by and led to victory in large part because of the leadership of clergy .. black and white . . . . . Dr Richard Land

Side: They should coincide
smilinbobs(590) Disputed
2 points

First I would like to mention that Nazism is a Christian based ideology. Hitler was a Catholic and had ties to the Catholic Church. He was exterminating the Jews who killed his savior.

I would argue that atheism does NOT cause people to be heinous and barbaric. The same can not be said of religion. The secular regimes that perpetrated so many evil deeds did so not due to a lack of religion but a quest for wealth and power. In history many more folks have suffered barbaric heinous treatment due to religion. It continues today with the Islamic faith. The cause of this treatment is not a quest for wealth or power it is religion.

When people oppress gays it is due to religion. Religious people put down those of us who don't believe in Gods as if they have some moral authority over us. Not all religious people are this way but many are which causes tension between the groups. This is what Hitchens is talking about.

Side: They should be seperate
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
0 points

For a guy who acts like he knows it all, you sure are ignorant.

Catholicism is not Christian, it is pagan, an attempt by government forces to control Christianity and secure power. Hitler was in bed with them promising to set them up as the world religion if they supported his efforts, and to prove their support for Hitler they allowed Hitler to kill hundred of priests who had moral objections to Hitler's ambitions.

Hitler was deep into the occult, and his basic appeal to his followers was believing in superiority of Arians as the destined evolution of the Human race. Hitler was no more Christian than Satan was Christian.

Sure, Pol Pot who killed one third of the people in Cambodia as an atheist, and Stalin the atheist who killed millions of his own people but made the trains run on time, that punk who shot up Columbine high school while wearing a T-shirt that read "survival of the fittest".....their atheistic and evolutionary beliefs had nothing to do with this........and Hitler was an evolutionist who believed in survival of the fittest which was to propel the Aryans forward in evolutionary development........

How did you get to be so dumb when you talk like you know everything?

Side: They should coincide
Saintnow(3684) Disputed
0 points

oh so atheists in communism are excused for killing millions of their own people because they are not religious so there's nothing wrong with it because morality is a religious idea and atheists make up their own morals. Your nutso.

Side: They should coincide
J-Roc77(70) Disputed
1 point

So since baseball is secular, by the definiton your source is using...it is then atheist based?

Sorry nope.

Just because something is areligious doesn't make it atheist based.

Side: They should be seperate
1 point

Government loves Mooslimes ! So where is separate under Oblunder ?

Side: They should coincide
1 point

It is not possible to separate religion from government, even atheistic communism is religious. All laws are moral judgements and morality is a religious concept, even if the conceiver of the laws is atheistic. We are not animals, and our uncles were not monkeys.

Side: They should coincide
minimurph83(194) Disputed
2 points

It is possible, religion has no place in law, government or education, religion is a personal choice and not reflective of the bigger picture, our country's, city's and towns are far to diverse to have one religion rule the roost! regardless of the past its the current and the future we need to reflect and judge and we don't need religion for that.

And you know my opinion we don't need religion full stop! and you cant ban me in this debate can you nutjob!

Side: They should be seperate

Yes I believe in separation of Church and State.

Theocracies never work and tend to breed discord and violence. Infighting, fractioning of the State.

And obviously the Founding Fathers agreed with that since mandatory non sanctioning of a specific religion is in our Constitution, as well as our Bill of Rights.

Besides, just think if we let religious zealots into power. How would you like somebody like Saint Nobody to have his finger on the button?

Scary!

God Bless.

Side: They should be seperate
2 points

There are numerous examples in history and presently, of theocracies seriously violating human rights. While a secular state does not guarantee that will not happen, a theocratic state almost guarantees that it will to some extent. This depends on the religion and the nature of the leaders.

Any religion can be highly disputed in terms of accuracy, relevancy and authenticity. A more objective approach should be used in the governance of a nation.

People in any modern nation could follow any number of religions, or choose not to follow any. These people should not be forced to live under the subjective moral standards of an opposing religion.

Side: They should be seperate
dadman(1703) Clarified
1 point

These people should not be forced to live under the subjective "moral standards" of an opposing religion ... especially Atheism

Side: They should coincide
Darkyear(345) Clarified
2 points

Not exactly an "opposing religion".

And what, pray tell, are the "subjective moral standards" of atheism, anyway?

Side: They should coincide
2 points

religion is a personal choice, and should play no part in any laws or government issues.

Government should be from a neutral stance for the benefit of all not look after the interest of the few.

Side: They should be seperate
2 points

There are several examples, today, where it isn't. Iran, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc.

What? You say that's not the Christian religion?? Okay. Happily, Christians had that chance during earlier centuries and they learned that, given the chance, Christianity could be JUST as evil! Taking money from people to support the church .... whether they liked it or not, lopping off heads if they didn't! Or throwing them in un-Christian-like dungeons!

Make NO mistake about it, give ANY Abrahamic religion the power, and they'll use it ! For control, for money, for EVIL! (In the name of GOD, of course!)

Side: They should be seperate
2 points

I don't trust EITHER government authorities OR religious authorities, but at least in democratic societies with civil rights we have at least a slim chance of influencing whom those government authorities consist of and what rules they impose. With regard to religion, anyone can be entrenched indefinitely and can get whatever way they want so long as they can rationalize God wants it. Warren Jeffs could pretty much say and do whatever he wanted in the towns where he controlled everything.

Separating religion and government is a basic protective check and balance idea.

Side: They should be seperate
1 point

no where does the Church run and operate an entity of the Government

Side: They should be seperate
3 points

Tell that to Yemen, Afghanistan, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Somalia, Sudan and Mauritania; they are theocracies and a nightmare to live in.

Side: They should coincide
dadman(1703) Clarified
1 point

well to date .... Islam runs no entity of the US government ............. yet

PS: Islam is not "church"

Side: They should coincide
1 point

the government should not deal with social issues. Ideally it should only regulate business things. they get a weird pass on marriage as it's still a financial institution that changes the taxes for individuals.and there's probably a few more examples where a pass on social issues are given. but the second they get involved in social issues, you get weird rulings where a person can sue you for not putting big purple dicks on a cake.

Side: They should be seperate
AlofRI(3294) Disputed
1 point

It is supposed to be a "Government OF the people, BY the people, FOR the people". The people ARE the society, so I don't see where the peoples government should stay out of issues that effect them, socially. It's the CHURCH that should stay out of the government! There are so many different churches, mosques, synagogues, with different ideals that THEY should ONLY make societal rules that pertain to their own but DON'T overstep the laws the collective society, that THEY and THEIR government has decided will be the American way.

Side: They should coincide