Being Pro, I believe that Noah's Ark did happen as biblical literalists claim to be. My only requests for this debate is that my opponent prove to me the following: (A) A worldwide flood did Not ever happened. (B) Noah and his family did NOT create an Ark filled with animals and survive such a massive disaster. Remember, everything must be proven scientifically without having at any time resorting to the tired "God did it". Please make your arguments clear and orderly, and let's ha...

First I would like to define two of the words in my title for this debate so we're on the same page, so to speak. Indoctrinate, as defined by Merriam-Webster, is to instruct especially in fundamentals or rudiments. Superior is defined as something, or someone of higher rank, quality, or importance. Now with those two terms defined I would like to address why such indoctrination is wrong. All religions have in one form or another; a set of rituals, or beliefs, that must be performed, or held i...

I don't know CiRrO personally, but I have studied his teachings and I believe that there is truth in what he says. I will outline his basic premises. I would really like to see what another member has to say. ****CiRro's Philosophy**** 1) The first absolute moral duty that each member of a society has is to uphold justice, in it's purest form. According to him, a society not built on justice is destined to crumble. 2) Sacrifices are necessary to ensure a greater stability, which i...

There is tons of scriptual proof to support my argument and i will post that when this debate is excepted....

Being Pro, I support that the Christian god has not done everything in his power to save his people from eternal damnation. He may have given us the opportunity to be saved, but this is presuming that he exists. The biggest step of all is to believe that he exists, and I do not believe he has done everything in his might to prove to everyone he exists either. It is up to con to prove that he has done everything in his power to save us from eternal damnation. Already, billions of people a...

generation after generation....music genres such as roc n roll, hard rock, heavy metal and death metal have been tagged as being satanic! i find that being completely ridiculous because you can't just tag a band for being just because of the type of music that particular band plays. I'm not saying that there aren't satanic bands out there and i'm not saying that they are few because i have to admit that a considerable amount of death metal bands are at least anti-christian. On the other...

Hello, To start I would like to clarify that I Believe that morality is merely an illusion...but I also believe it is one that we should act as if it is real. This, however, is a theoretical debate. It states that morality must be absolute if it is to "exist" at all. For morality to be relative would mean that it is completely conditional, and is to the whim of those who follow it. The concept of morality is basically the same as rules, and if no one has to follow the rules exempt people ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_I1YTdiuXro This person is trying to show the flawed reasoning of people who try to say that evolution is a statistical impossibility. He does a very good job of that. My question would be, very simply, where did the "salt" come from. If life started out a some random material and then evolved into what we are today, where did the random material come from? What was the random material? Evolution, though it claims to be absolutely scientific cannot answer these ...

I know CiRrO personally, but he doesn't know who I am yet. I intend to prove that he is really a Sith. Reasons: 1. He is dark. Not emo dark. He is always in the midst of conflict; manipulating it to either increase his own pleasure or increase his own power/gain. 2. His eyes are dark blue, with black circles under them. 3. He loves Darth Revan. 4. He has this odd ability to make people do what he wants, and believe what he wants. That's why he is a Sith....

It is my contention that the argument in favor in the belief of God known as "Pascal's Wager" is not logically valid. I will start with a brief summary of Pascal's Wager from Wikipedia, though I assume that my opponent will be at least somewhat familiar with it. Pascal's Wager: Pascal begins with the premise that the existence or non-existence of God is not provable by human reason, since the essence of God is "infinitely incomprehensible". Since reason cannot decide the question, one must "w...