CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Golden Oldies: Does God Exist?
In an effort to revive the site I will try to put up a few good general topic debates. These will likely be things that veterans of the site have rehashed 50 times. But seeing as we are catering to new users, might as well bring some back.
I do not think a rational person can maintain a belief in God. There is no evidence of a God other than individual anecdotal experiences and the nature of the world indicates that if God did exist, he is either evil or powerless.
Speaking as a golden oldie ;-), it doesn't in MY world. Total mythology. I do respect the belief(s) of others, though, Christian Jew, Muslim …. whatever.
I do respect the belief(s) of others, though, Christian Jew, Muslim …. whatever.
I don't. I think those people are idiots. I have no respect for their antiquated and ridiculous beliefs, any more than I would have respect for someone who believes the Earth is the centre of the universe or the Moon is made of cheese. For some reason, when it comes to religion, we are bullied into "respecting" farcical notions which under any other circumstances would be laughed at and ridiculed.
I respect YOUR right to YOUR belief also and I believe in much of what you said. On the other hand, I don't feel, or agree, with your attitude toward others who have the right to their own thoughts. I'm totally against what I consider brainwashing by religious leaders and "educators", but, I don't interfere with others beliefs. For sure I give my opinion OF their beliefs. I object to their (IMO), overstepping their bounds …. like putting up religious symbols on public property, like their forcing the "In God We Trust" and "So Help Me God" symbolism on our money and in our courts, but I "respect" their right to do whatever in their own environment …. as long as it's within Constitutional law. I even believe YOU can think and feel as you do. I have the right to disagree with you and I DO , WHERE I do. I would not swear on a Bible in court, I would swear on the Constitution, to do otherwise would be dishonest at best. I would be swearing on a book of lies, again, IMO.
I don't feel, or agree, with your attitude toward others who have the right to their own thoughts.
As FM already pointed out for me, being religious is the precise opposite of having your own thoughts. Are you telling me that if you placed a newborn baby in total isolation for two decades it would emerge in its early twenties to tell you all about how Jesus raised himself from the dead? Obviously this is absurd. People only become religious after they are exposed to religion. Religion is an infectious disease and this is how infectious diseases work. You are exposed to someone else who has it.
No. I am telling you nothing of the sort. I do NOT believe in any god, I do not believe in any religion. I DO believe in the right of any person to believe what S/HE needs to believe. I believe a "man" named Jesus existed. A charismatic MAN with new ideas. Ideas that gathered a large "imaginative following" that imagined "miracles". At that time, miracles "happened" in the uneducated minds of the masses. I detest religions myself, but what others believe is their business. Eventually, religions will die as science finds answers. I am NOT infected with a religious disease, it is an imaginary affliction that I want no part of, but, I can't say others have no right to believe what they believe, ridiculous as I believe it is.
You are if you are telling me religion involves freedom of thought. It involves the suppression of freedom of thought.
I do NOT believe in any god, I do not believe in any religion.
Good for you.
I DO believe in the right of any person to believe what S/HE needs to believe.
Nobody "needs" to believe in religious nonsense. That's just false reasoning. I refer you back to my earlier example of a newborn baby kept in isolation. Would they "need" religion?
You can't claim to "need" something if it isn't there and you have no idea it even exists. That isn't how it works. Nobody "needs" anything until first they have it and it gets taken away. Even then, unless we are talking about bodily organs or life support, "need" is entirely the wrong word.
I believe a "man" named Jesus existed.
Which there is no historical evidence to support. Hence, it shows that, despite what you write (which may all be true), religion -- specifically Christianity -- has nevertheless had some form of influence over you.
I detest religions myself, but what others believe is their business
Not when it impacts other people it isn't. Not when it ruins the lives of children it isn't.
And I agree with you, DD. I have NO love for ANY religion. I only say that people HAVE THE RIGHT to believe what they wish … or not. I do not and that is my right.
I don't feel, or agree, with your attitude toward others who have the right to their own thoughts.
People don't have their own thoughts. Religious people have the thoughts that their religion tells them to have. Religion is inherently antithetical to free thought and free thought is impossible in the first place because whether you see through bullshit or believe in it comes down to wisdom and intelligence, not choice.
I'm totally against what I consider brainwashing by religious leaders and "educators", but, I don't interfere with others beliefs.
When "others beliefs" are religious in nature it is because they have been brainwashed, even if they are so incredibly stupid that they "chose" to be brainwashed. What the hell is so liberating about being objectively wrong and not being corrected?
I have my own thoughts and I intend to listen to them. You have YOUR thoughts and I will "listen to them", but, it isn't likely they will change mine. That type of attitude keep me FROM being brainwashed by people who think they know everything.
"The fundamental cause of trouble in the world is that the stupid are cocksure, while the intelligent are full of doubt." Bertrand Russell ;-)
If you had any idea how hypocritical the words coming out of your old mouth, you would stop debating!
I've been in this site for a few years now speaking out to how the Democrat Party and the Left is trying to indoctrinate our impressionable children in public schools to this LGBT hysteria.
You sit there telling us you are against brainwashing by religious leaders and educators, but elect the arrogant control fanatics brainwashing our children to deny the Science of Biology and teach them that Gay sex is natural.
How blind can you be to your hypocrisy? You can't even stand allowing symbols of our Christian heritage to be shown on public land. You are no better than dictators trying to control the people with only your Political correct cult!
Hey fool bigot... it is Science deniers like you who actually believe that Homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation. Talk about Political correct denial. Try taking Biology once more because you obviously missed it.
You are a walking example of non Christians who are so easily manipulated to believe anything the Left tells you to believe.
Your words are speaking to yourself. Your disrespect and hatred for those who do not believe as you, makes you an intolerant narcissistic joke.
I do not believe Homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation because I do not deny proven Science.
I'm a Christian and God also tells us Homosexuality is not natural.
The difference between me and you? I don't hate Gays for being different than me. I treat them the same as every other person I meet.
The LGBT activists trying to indoctrinate our children to deny Science are the ones I speak out against.
it is Science deniers like you who actually believe that Homosexuality is a natural sexual orientation.
Oh, so it's an artificial one? We program people to become gay?
As I've told you umpteen times before you ridiculously insane moron, if it happens in nature then it's natural. The fact is you don't care one iota about science or you'd believe in evolution instead of the insane crock of crap the Bible has filled your head with. You use words like "science" only as tools to con other people while you're simultaneously trying to convince them that the world is only 6,000 years old and Jesus rose from the dead.
The only funny thing is how insane you are. Open a goddamned book you dribbling idiot:-
Homosexual behavior in animals is sexual behavior among non-human species that is interpreted as homosexual or bisexual. This may include same-sex sexual activity, courtship, affection, pair bonding, and parenting among same-sex animal pairs.[1][2][3] Various forms of this are found in every major geographic region and every major animal group.
The word theory, in scientific vernacular, does not mean "unproven hypothesis". It means a framework of interpretation that best fits all the available factual evidence. So, for example:
An object dropped from the atmosphere falls to the Earth. In order to stop this, we must exert a force moving away from the Earth. This, in light of the laws of motion, means that there is also a force acting upon objects which comes from the Earth. this force is known as gravity. This explanation is scientifically and factually sound, ergo, it is now part of "the Theory of Gravity".
The theory of evolution by natural selection is also a theory in the same regard. The facts are these: deepest in the Earth's atmosphere are relatively simple forms of life, and a smaller variation of lifeforms. As we move through the crust, from deepest to shallowest, we see gradually more complex, more variable, forms of life. Ergo, over time, life got more complex and more varied. Ergo, simple live gradually gave way to more complex life. Ergo, simple, relatively small numbers of life-forms gradually, over time, diverged into more complex, more diverse life. Ergo, evolution occurred. This is part of the theory of evolution by natural selection.
But, as usual, you will come back with some obtuse remark like "when did you last see a giraffe turn into a monkey", thereby illustrating your complete lack of scientific ability.
Remember when people told us that Pluto was a planet? Now they say it is not. So called experts change their positions all the time and the ones trying to tell us all how climate change is mainly caused by man are politically motivated.
Same with Evolution. People use it when it suits their politics.
1: Evolution is science, has evidence and most of science consists of theories.
2: A theory has evidence by definition, or else it would be a mere hypothesis.
3: Evolution is actually understood better than Gravity and can be confirmed as fact whereas we know the mechanics of how orbits work but not the actual nature of what causes them.
Nahhh... I'm from the left.. I LIKE to be warm, and I LIKE to drive. Always have. Fossil fuel does that for me. But, when using fossil fuel fucks up the environment, it's time to invent something new, and we did.. The only reason you'd be against that is if you have a financial stake in oil. So, let's RID ourselves of this pox.
Evolution CANNOT be seen, so it's easy to deny it.. But, the PROOF that fossil fuel POLLUTES can be SEEN by your eyeballs and SMELLED by your nose. Of course you can DENY it, and I suspect you will..
But, back to fixing climate change.. Would you go for a TWOFER??
Speaking of denial.. I've heard from your side the INSANE proposition that we'll NEVER run out oil.. However, no matter how much you LOVE fossil fuel, we're gonna run out. Lemme say that again. We're GONNA run out. Clearly, if you LOOK at our globe, you can SEE with your own eyes, that if something is REMOVED from it, there will be LESS and LESS of whatever it is that we removed.. That's NOT science.. It's math.. When you subtract something FROM something, you have LESS of it.
So, let's concentrate on REPLACING fossil fuel BEFORE it runs out, and we CURE climate change at the same time.
How's that?
excon
PS> By the by.. Where I live, I stay warm with hydroelectric power. Stinky fossil fuels need not apply..
My side? I have NEVER EVER heard anyone from my side saying we would never run out of fossil fuels.
Deceptive as always!
When we start running out of it, which will be forecast many decades before it happens, the greatest minds of our time will come up with the beast alternatives.
That's when we will know it is not coming from a bunch of tree hugging Liberals who have hated fossil fuels forever.
I have NEVER EVER heard anyone from my side saying we would never run out of fossil fuels.
But you ignore everything you don't want to hear. Yesterday you claimed there are no gay animals, and then doubled down on it when Wikipedia told you that you are gravely mistaken. In short, you're a damned idiot.
Shut up you scientifically illiterate shite gobbler. You have never studied or given a shit about science in your entire life. You don't even know what a theory is and you ignore anyone who corrects you.
Gravity is less well understood than evolution by means of natural selection.
As for the reclassification of cosmic objects, that has absolutely nothing to do with evolution. The only reason Pluto was reclassified was because if we didn't reclassify it, there would be thousands of other objects in our solar system that we would also have to classify as planets. As we have discovered, through space exploration, there are many, many Pluto-sized objects orbiting the sun at vast distances.
Evolution is an accepted scientific theory.
As for climate change, the increase in greenhouse gasses since the industrial revolution is undoubtedly caused by humans. The effect of these gasses in the atmosphere is well understood to cause a rise in average global temperatures.
This is also fact.
The only one using "science" for politics here is you. You cherry pick what science you accept and what science you don't, so that you can continue in your fanciful notions that your fairy-book has any logical basis in reality, and so you can continue to believe absolute outlandish nonsense like "evolution didn't happen" and "climate change is a myth".
Nahhh.. Just in case you're interested, here's what Dictionary.com says about it:
SCIENTIFIC THEORY, noun;
a coherent group of propositions formulated to explain a group of facts or phenomena in the natural world and repeatedly confirmed through experiment or observation.
Here's a link.. No, no.. It's NOT a church.. It's a DICTIONARY..
Oh God you are just LAUGHABLY STUPID. Evolution was a theory, when it was put forward HUNDREDS OF YEARS AGO. Since then an abundance of proof has been found. That's how scientific theories work, imbecile. If scientists can't debunk them within two or three hundred years they are eventually accepted to be true.
For someone who loves to ban and ignore people you sure love to leave the comfort of your own debates to argue with people and then as soon as you start getting slapped you ignore.
Why do you choose 6 replies later to "ignore" him?
Why respond to him in the first place? Id guarantee he's banned from your debates automatically.
