- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
I would argue that religion provides no intrinsic purpose to life either. On a superficial level perhaps but overall? If we are all just existing to provide a deity with a purpose for existence there is no overall purpose. We live our lives and then go to heaven/hell for eternity, but for what? I don't find the idea of being forced to live for eternity particularly attractive.
Life without religion is all the more worthwhile; all the more valuable. It gives us motivation not to sit and wait around but to seize every opportunity. It lets us know that we are in control of our own lives and we need to establish our own purposes.
Need it be said; just because religion gives people hope or purpose does not make it true. It may help people get through hard times but I would suggest that this sort of hope is detrimental. It encourages people to pray, wait and hope for the best. This is asinine. As a species we need to learn to face reality as what it is; it may not be what we want it to be; but it's all we've got.
Pluto was demoted from planetary status due to a number of prominent factors. The first was that, like Ceres it was surrounded by many objects of similar size and composition. Ceres was first thought to be a planet because of its spherical shape but later on it was labelled a dwarf planet due to its size, and the surrounding bodies were called asteroids.
Secondly Pluto’s orbit is substantially different from those of the other planets. It is inclined and varies from being around 49AU to 30AU from the sun. It is also very small having a radius of 1180km, smaller then our moon. Charon, Pluto’s moon, has a radius of around 600km. Which initiated another debate over whether or not it should be called a binary planetary system. Astronomers soon discovered many other objects around Pluto such as Makemake and Sedna which were similar in size to that of Pluto. Then in early 2005 Eris was discovered and it was larger than Pluto. This led to the revaluation of the definition of ‘planet’ in 2006 by the IAU. The traditional definition of a planet (a celestial body moving around a star) was changed, and for an object to be classified as a planet it had to;
Be in orbit around the Sun,
Have sufficient mass to assume hydrostatic equilibrium
Have had "cleared the neighbourhood" around its orbit.
If an object was found but only met the first two points it would be classified as a dwarf planet. Pluto, Eris and the other asteroids are now considered part of the Kuiper belt.
God doesn't "send" anyone to hell. Think of it like this. If you were getting pulled down the river by strong currents about to go over a waterfall and a rope was thrown to you. Would you grab onto it? If you don't you allow yourself to suffer whatever comes. Annihilationism (The theory that you'll will be annihilated in hell and removed from existence)and universalism (That you will eventually get out) are completely unbiblical ideas. Hell is clearly a place of physical torment. Being let out does not solve the problem with sin. If you go to jail for murder and are let out, you're still a murderer. Annhialationism is also completely unjust. Murderers, rapists so forth get away with it all?
God is also just. A judge letting everyone off on earth would not be tolerated so why do we expected it from Him?