Religions cause more harm than good

REBUTTAL/DEFENSE/CONTENTIONS First of all, I would like to point out that my opponent's rebuttal was not much of a rebuttal. My opponent did not disprove my argument but merely deflected my point. Yes, of course there politically based wars, I was merely pointing out that religions are more often than not a leading factor in war, blood shed and injustice. Martin Luther's Protestant Reformation, European colonization was fueled by God, Glory, and Gold. The Europeans saw it as their DUTY to spread the word Christ amongst the natives, this incessant need to Christianize others led to the torture of many of the natives. This attitude carried over into the Age of Imperialism. I would like to share with you the first two stanzas of a poem by Rudyard Kipling: "Take up the White Man's burden-- Send forth the best ye breed-- Go bind your sons to exile To serve your captives' need; To wait in heavy harness, On fluttered folk and wild-- Your new-caught, sullen peoples, Half-devil and half-child. Take up the White Man's burden-- In patience to abide, To veil the threat of terror And check the show of pride; By open speech and simple, An hundred times made plain To seek another's profit, And work another's gain." (1) During this time European colonization went into overdrive. And one of the leading reasons was to spread Christianity. It was common European belief that if another did not believe in the divinity of Christ then they were "savages" and these savages needed to be introduced and assimilated. September 11, fueled by radical Muslims. Wars versus the Shiites and Sunnis, in Bahrain the Shiites and Sunnis fiercely fight and protest against each other resulting in deaths. 1. HEALTH BENEFITS B) MENTAL: I would also like to point out that my opponent's supposed mental benefit is void. First my opponents states that "religious practices fosters one's health and well-being, most notably partaking in public religious participation..." This in itself is not necessarily a benefit. As we are arguing whether or not religion benefits society, the use of "public religious participation" as a benefit does not work in this argument as it is under scrutiny. PSYCHOLOGICAL: My opponent stated that "Community rituals may also help build and maintain alliances..." But I argue that religions, more often cause social and national divides, than strengthening alliances. In colonial America, for example, several colonies were created strictly for religious purposes. Massachusetts; in 1620 the Pilgrims/Separatists, who wished to permanently separate from the Church of England, sailed to the New World in search of a land where they could worship as they pleased; the Puritans founded the Massachusetts Bay colony because of sever persecution in England; William Penn created Pennsylvania with the hope of creating a religious haven for Quakers, who were also being persecuted and jailed in England. Even today, there are conflicts between Catholicism and Protestantism in Ireland. Northern Ireland, remaining separate from England, retained its Catholic heritage whilst the Southern side of the island became Protestant. While not necessarily a pure religious war, religion is still being used to manipulate people against each other; as evidenced by this quote: "Political and religious leaders have skillfully exploited religious differences to manipulate, justify, inflame, divide or unite people, creating a culture of sectarian prejudice that either supports the existing power structure, or seeks reform, or reunification with Ireland"(2) Religion is not limited to promoting a cohesive society, it can be used to tear society, countries, and people apart. 2. TRADITION I would like to argue that tradition is NOT always, nor necessarily right. People may take comfort in tradition, but if tradition refuses to, or is unable to adapt to the times, it can be devastating. In general if anything fails to keep up with the times, it becomes obsolete. And like all things, an obsolete item has no value in society, and by no value I mean no practical value. A sundial, whats the point with automated clocks and watches. Now, with revisions and edits items can be kept from becoming obsolete; when was the last time the Bible was revised with the current state of society in mind? Society changes rapidly; people's ideals, wishes, needs, and beliefs; what was once accepted or appropriate is no longer so, and what was once inappropriate is now appropriate. If the religious texts, the religious ideals, the beliefs, and those accepted by religions cannot assimilate to an ever changing society then they become obsolete and need to be deleted from society. 3. POLITICS, SOCIAL As already stated in the Psychological benefits section. Politicians use religion to manipulate the people. "The pope said it is often "ideological manipulation of religion sometimes for political ends that is the real catalyst for tension and division and at times even violence in society." (3) As my opponent mentioned in their rebuttal: "However, I'd like to point out that most "religious wars" are actually politically based." And adding to social distress are cases of sexual abuse within the Catholic Church. Just this past month, hundreds of victims have come forward. Due to this abuse several people have committed suicide. And it is not only adolescents but also young children(6) 4. TOLERANCE,IGNORANCE While religion does not necessarily promote intolerance, during colonial America religion was used to justify slavery: "[Slavery] was established by decree of Almighty God...it is sanctioned in the Bible, in both Testaments, from Genesis to Revelation...it has existed in all ages, has been found among the people of the highest civilization, and in nations of the highest proficiency in the arts." Jefferson Davis, President, Confederate States of America"(4) This slavery became so embedded into American culture that it arose to hundreds of years of racial prejudice, which still continues today. Are the radical Muslims, terrorists, jihads, Klan members, members of The Sons of Freedom or members of The National Liberation Front of Tripura tolerant in any form? (the KKK, Sons of Freedom, and National Liberation Front are all religious terrorist groups). In terms of ignorance, there is a significant percentage of Christians who outright deny that the earth is 6.5 billion years old, that evolution is 'real', others claim that dinosaurs helped the Romans build. Does that count as ignorance? 5. SCIENCE,EVOLUTION Christians are the most ardent dissenters of the theory of Evolution. ""National polls consistently show that nearly 50 percent of Americans still don't accept Darwinism," says TIME science reporter Andrea Dorfman. "They believe that humans were created in their present form as according to Genesis -- just 10,000 years ago."(5) Half of Americans do not support a 'scientific fact'. Could religion support scientific ideals, yes. But history shows that people have a tendency to use religion to DISPUTE science. Even now, religious leaders question global warming (global climate change),(6) when the evidence is here that humans are affecting the environment negatively, the religious deny it. 7.RELIGION This argument is also void because the debate is whether or not religion is a benefit to society. Saying that anybody with ideals is religious does not support or oppose the resolution. RESOURCES: (1) http://www.wsu.edu... (2) http://www.flashpoints.info... (3) http://www.nydailynews.com... (4) http://www.religioustolerance.org... (5) http://www.youdebate.com... (6) http://www.washingtontimes.com...