CreateDebate


Debate Info

20
19
They learned science in church Cause it IS, lib
Debate Score:39
Arguments:40
Total Votes:41
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 They learned science in church (15)
 
 Cause it IS, lib (16)

Debate Creator

excon(4399) pic



Why do right wingers think science is left wing?

They learned science in church

Side Score: 20
VS.

Cause it IS, lib

Side Score: 19
2 points

I think there are two main reasons science is considered by the right to be left wing:

1) The obvious - religion. Because the only legitimate challenge to the stories and lessons in religion is the observations and theories provided by science, which makes it a rival to the religious right. And

2) Because the people with free enough thought to not be in goose step with conservative dogma tend to embrace science, particularly because it is open to free thought.

Side: They learned science in church
outlaw60(8861) Disputed
1 point

What science do you Progressives believe in is the question !

Side: Cause it IS, lib
wisdumb(77) Disputed
1 point

Don't listen to him. He's libertarian .

Side: They learned science in church
pizzakitty(37) Disputed
1 point

"The conservatives are against free thought" says the group boasting violent protesters just to keep us from speaking our different ideas; says the group that wants to arrest us for "hate crimes" that are actually a matter of opinion. No, science is liberal because it is not open to any school of thought besides that of the liberals.

Side: Cause it IS, lib
Grenache(5564) Disputed
1 point

How do either of the examples you give link directly to science? Did a league of scientists come out with statements that say those things? Enlighten me. Because without that your argument is just a basic anti-liberal argument, not an anti-science one.

Side: They learned science in church
2 points

I need to start off by saying I don't think all right wingers thinking science is left wing. I would imagine the vast majority believe in science and fact, even with religion.

I think those that fight against it are the ones that don't want to entertain a thought that they need to change their life style. They have theirs so why should they worry about anyone else still trying? If the vast majority of scientists say there is something wrong and it may require a change; it will be fought against. Perhaps it's scary to them, perhaps they feel they know better than scientists, perhaps they feel their belief is better than anyone with a degree or experience. Who knows?

Side: They learned science in church
outlaw60(8861) Disputed
1 point

Mint Jewel shows her hand and her Communist ways ! Good Job Progressive !

"I think those that fight against it are the ones that don't want to entertain a thought that they need to change their life style. They have theirs so why should they worry about anyone else still trying? If the vast majority of scientists say there is something wrong and it may require a change"

Well spoken you COMMIE !!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side: Cause it IS, lib
Mint_tea(2531) Disputed
2 points

Your comments are a combination of ludicrous, idiotic, nonsensical and repetitive. Good job you multitasker you.

Side: They learned science in church
2 points

The US is preoccupied with this two party system. It's the equivalent of rooting for your favorite team in a sports match. The people in power present a choice in two parts in order to make it easy for them to manipulate the simple minded. This is a divide and conquer strategy in which both sides lose in the long run. It's the same strategy used by major corporations in order to manipulate consumers into buying their products. Pepsi vs Coke, Mac vs PC, Apple vs Android, Mcdonalds and Burger King, Whole Foods and Trader Joes, Playstation Vs Xbox, Marvel Vs DC, and so on and so on.

Each team completely contradicts the other side for no good reason whatsoever and is divided on literally every topic that comes up. Those who subscribe to the parties blindly follow what the predominant leaders of each say just like a football match. Anytime anybody disagrees with their ideology, they are assumed to be a supporter of the other team since their simple minds can't think in numbers greater than 2.

Science and Religion are a strong dichotomy in politics so naturally, the two teams needed to split them up. In my opinion, it could've went either direction and been equally as relevant. People would subscribe the their side just the same. Only the truly enlightened make decisions on their own regardless of what the parties stand for.

Lets take a look at the divided issues: Prolife or ProChoice? Science or Religion? Socialist or Fascist? Immigration or Wall? Education or Military? Universal Healthcare? Gay Marriage or Sanctity? Pro Genders or Obstinate? Death Penalty? Confederate flag? Euthanasia? Electoral College? Muslim or Christian? Guns or no Guns? Marijuana? Flag Burning? Net Neutrality? Political Correctness? Student Loans? Climate Change? Evolution? Fracking? Alternative Energy? DAPL? Vaccination? GMO? Space Travel? Police Cameras?

They are literally divided on every issue. So pick your issue and you could ask the same question about any of them.

Side: They learned science in church

Science predates liberalism and is happening now in Communist nations and predominantly right wing nations. It's like magic..

Side: They learned science in church
1 point

Because this discussion is too stupid, i have to post the same response on both sides. Left wingers are left wing, science is objective. Why do left wingers think science is not objective?

Side: They learned science in church
1 point

Yet another loaded question with no dichotomy (or any semblance of fairness, for that matter) presented in regards to the sides one can take.

That aside, let's begin:

Right off the bat, the assumption intrinsic to the question at hand (that "right wingers" believe science to belong to the political Left) has no basis whatsoever. No sources, hearsay examples, or even supporting text are provided by the OP. This assumption, therefore, is entirely baseless.

Further, I myself, being what the original poster would refer to as a "right winger", have never believed science to be the domain of the political Left. I would even go so far as to say that I know of no so-called "right-winger" who claims this. It follows, then, that not all "right-wingers" believe this to be the case, and thus the OP is fundamentally flawed.

This is entirely conjecture, but I'm guessing the basis behind this debate (irrational as it is) is the overwhelming tendency of academia to lean towards the political Left. Of course, if you're to make this correlation, you must also recognize that academia (specifically colleges and universities, where a good deal of the aforementioned science is facilitated) is the infamous home of so-called "snowflakes", usually adult students whose beliefs are so fragile as to require protection from other points of view, climaxing in the form of "safe spaces". Does this mean that scientists are all "snowflakes"? Of course not. The same applies to political stances; in other words, so what? Correlation is not equivalent to causation, much less the shared belief set of a political party.

Side: They learned science in church
excon(4399) Disputed
1 point

Hello Lich:

You are a piece of work.. You SAY my question is loaded.. You SAY it's irrational.. You SAY it's unfair..

Then you go ahead and answer by admitting that science IS indeed LEFT WING because it's taught in COLLEGE, and we ALL know how left wing college is..

You're silly..

excon

Side: Cause it IS, lib
LichPotato(362) Disputed
1 point

"You are a piece of work.. You SAY my question is loaded.. You SAY it's irrational.. You SAY it's unfair.."

All of which are demonstrably accurate.

"Then you go ahead and answer by admitting that science IS indeed LEFT WING because it's taught in COLLEGE, and we ALL know how left wing college is.."

If you'd care to read my statement in its entirety, I blatantly reject your claim on a rational basis.

Since I'm apparently forced to repeat it, my argument follows as such: just because colleges hold a particular stance on a given issue does not mean that science itself belongs to that stance. My logical basis for this claim is taking your logic and substituting terms; in this case, the overwhelming fragility of the views of college students.

Side: They learned science in church
2 points

Progressives are all in on the hoax that is Climate Change that is the science they are programmed to believe. Come On EXCON it is the Religion of the Left !!!!!!!!

Side: Cause it IS, lib
2 points

The Left loves fake science such as climate change being something new. CLIMATE ALWAY CHANGES! This is why the fools on the Left changed the name from global cooling to global warming and finally gave up and just called it climate change.

Science has already had some liars in their midst who were politicallly motivated. They skewed the numbers on their climate change rhetoric.

Who knows how rampant fake science is today.

Side: Cause it IS, lib
1 point

Because this discussion is too stupid, i have to post the same response on both sides. Left wingers are left wing, science is objective. Why do left wingers think science is not objective?

Side: Cause it IS, lib

We find this simply because science allows you to question everything and make changes when necessary, which does not go well with the right wing mentality..

Side: Cause it IS, lib
1 point

Science is not a left wing study, the people running it are just left wingers. In order to be scientists, they get a degree from a left wing university (you can tell because all the protests are on different campuses, which also happen to provide "safe spaces").

Side: Cause it IS, lib