Religion as a form of worship should be banned

Foundation Of Religion". .. If we just make Religion all about creativity, then it’s useless, and soon the creativity will vanish as artists or people cannot find inspiration from Religion. What influenced and inspired the artists who made beautiful Religious art? They’re faith and tremendous belief to Religion, and for them and a huge number of people, religion is a highly important and positive part of their everyday lives. .. ". Why would people not be able to find inspiration from religion if worship was banned? I'm not suggesting all religious books be banned as these are the where all the inspiration is. Con can't even prove that these ancient artists created these works simply because they believed in a supernatural being. What we know is that their works depict scenes from religious scripture. We don't know that God had anything to do with their inspiration and for the purposes of the debate we can't assume something that we don't know to be true. This is a list of some of the most influential artistic atheists[1]. Dogma"‘Faith’ is such an overrated word, some people misinterpret it, faith is a trust in something, faith in God and faith in yourself is an important aspect of human nature. .. ". My opponent has left the task of defining faith to me. Faith, as defined by the Concise Oxford English Dictionary: n. 1 complete trust or confidence I understand that as this definition is not printed on the Internet it is not readily available for most voters (and, of course, my opponent) to verify but I trust that you will have faith in my definition. ". .. like ‘I hope I pass the exam to make it to the next grade’ or ‘Please, please, let my father live and survive the surgery’. Faith is considered to be one of the most important values to have in life". According to the Oxford English Dictionary you are using the wrong definition of faith here. When you say "I hope I pass the exam to make it to the next grade" you are not having faith but rather hope. You say this yourself. Similarly when you say "Please, please, let my father live and survive the surgery" you do not know that he will survive; therefore you have 'hope' and not 'faith'. You would like to have faith, of course, your father has just had surgery but you simply do not no that he will survive. "Faith is considered to be one of the most important values to have in life". Please give evidence to suggest that this is true as you only demonstrated that hope is an important aspect of live. "There are lots of evidence and arguments supporting the existence of God, but that’s another topic. .. "Please do not state a fact that you are not willing to prove. ". .. and if you say that you do not believe in something that has’t been proved, then you shouldn’t believe in extraterrestrial beings as you stated in your external view point in the previous round, because there are no evidence that they exist". I do not state that I have a belief in extra-terrestrial-beings and I shall make this very clear to you later in this round. "Just because people have faith is not a reasonable reason to deprive them of Religion". I have set out to prove why religion as a form of worship should be banned and I have given reasonable arguments in relation to why this should happen. "I can’t seem to understand your point in this matter, but as the website say. .. ". I assume you are referring to this website[2]. Do not, under under any circumstances, accuse me of being a Nazi or a supporter of Hitler in any way, what-so-ever! I made no suggestion that I support him and he has nothing to do with atheism. He was a Catholic! Now that we're clear on that; I shall explain propaganda and faith. Propaganda, as defined by Google: Information, esp. of a biased or misleading nature, used to promote or publicize a particular political cause or point of view. Now; propaganda and faith are clearly to different things. One is a personal assumption of something to be true and the other is the art of persuading others that something is true. Hitler had faith in his belief that Jewish people where inferior to every-one else. The problem was that he used propaganda to spread this belief. You only way that you can prevent this from happening would be for people to question what they are told (most people didn't question Hitler). This would also involve questioning religion, which can't be done as it is based on faith. I stated this in round two and my opponent still hasn't provided an alternative method for preventing propaganda. "You say that people will take the church’s word on everything. .. since most countries are secular ones, where the separation of church and state policy is enforced, there may be times where the government can overrule the church’s objections based on religious grounds since the state has a higher authority, but that doesn’t mean that religion should be banned". Yes; the state can intervene but it shouldn't have to. People should know when the church is going a step to far and choose not to follow it. The problem is people grow up accepting what the church has to say and they don't build up their own opinions. "You say that people will take the church’s word on everything, but that’s not true, we must consider other Religions and other people’s belief. .. "Considering other peoples views doesn't have anything to do with people taking the church's word for everything. I'm not biased though; I think all religions should be banned as a form of worship. An External View Point "'Imagine an alien looking at our planet. .. ' That statement somewhat suggests thate you believe in extraterrestrials"Maybe it would help if I defined the term 'alien'. Alien, as defined by the Concise Oxford English Dictionary: n. 1 a foreigner, especially one who is not a naturalized citizen of the country where they are living. In other words an alien is an outsider. In this context a hypothetical outsider capable of studying human's and their practices. The fact that I was not referring to extra-terrestrials rubbishes the rest of my opponent's argument, so I will not bother quoting it. ". .. We already have a number of people like scientists and philosophers to do those things, examine life, and we do not need to brainwash people and force them on thinking scientifically while their beliefs are ignored and left behind, because it’s such a shameful tactic considering that we live in a society that values morals and rights". The point is: science isn't brainwashing. Science isn't a thing like religion is. It is the practise of coming to a conclusion based on factual workings. People don't have to take some-one's word for something; they can ask a question and set out to find an answer by studying the facts that they have. I'm simply asking that people be forced to think for themselves; a paradox, though, it may seem. "But let me ask you this even though it’s rhetorical, will your view on this topic be different if you were raised by strict Catholic parents in Ireland, or raised in a religious Hindu community in India"? Actually; my parents are protestants who attend church every Sunday. My opponents arguments Actually; my opponent has no arguments! "As I said in my previous statements, banning Religion is undesirable, harmful and best of all, unlawful". Yes; banning religion would, currently, be unlawful. I am arguing as to why these laws should be taken away and religion banned. Con should be arguing as to why these laws should remain in enforcement. He goes on and on about the different laws that make banning religion illegal but does not state why they should remain in place: as per his task. His only sources relate to the previously mentioned laws. The closest he gets to a bona fide argument is where he states that "non-stop mayhem will happen and possibly, a massive world war can occur". This, however, can be disregarded as non-sourced, fanatical rubbish. Please see comments for sources.