Atheist VS. theism

I'm reading Tom Sawyer in class, so please excuse me if the grammar of mine is leaning slightly toward the lefthand side. In other words, I may be speaking like it is the olden most days, such as the early parts of the 1800s. Not docking me in spelling and grammar is something that I am most wishful for. I thank you many in advancement. Nah, I'm screwing with you. Let's get started. An atheist will be defined as a "person who does not believe in God or a mighty spiritual leader." A theist will be defined as a "person who believes in God or a mighty spiritual leader." I will be arguing that atheists are better (in life and science) than theists. My opponent will be arguing that theists are better (in life and in science) than atheists. For your first argument, I fail to see how it corresponds to the argument. She stated a fact, not why theism is better than atheism. I will not refute it unless you show me how it is relevant to this debate. Now, onto my arguments. --Argument 1: Actual life (facts from (1,2))-- After the Ancient times (ends in 476 C.E) Europe was cast into a dark age (called the Dark Ages.) During this period, there was only one thing that people focused on: getting into the afterlife. After the period ended, also known as the Renaissance, people started focusing more on the actual life in the current world, instead of just going to church day in and day out. The quality of life was improved greatly due to absence of religion. Even before the Renaissance, we see more disadvantages from the religious theists. For this argument, I will be looking back at what theists have done in the past (Medieval time period.) As you must know, the Crusades, ranging from 1095-1291, was a series of battles between the Christians and the Muslims (the Jews didn't do much.) Little good came from this war, as Jerusalem was left in a pile of blood and not much advanced. What did the Crusades actually do, though? Besides causing bickering throughout the whole Europe nation, they killed about 2,000,000 people (3). 2 million people died because of religion. Now keep in mind, these two groups (Muslims and Christians) believed mostly the same things, and they STILL fought. You don't see any major atheist wars, do you? The previous argument leads me right into my next argument: atheist do not fight their own kind. There are many types of theists: Polytheistics, Jews, Christians, Buddhists, Muslims, etc. However, an atheist solely lies on a single definition and a single kind (most of the time): the widespread belief that there is no Creator or God. The simple facts that they even fight eachother is pretty outstanding, don't you think? Atheists usually come to an agreement on their beliefs: God does not exist. Theists all believe God exists, but not which one(s). In conclusion, theism is a complicated belief system that the world, and life, would be better off without, at least by the standards of fighting. Now, let's look at present day. The average church time (taken from many answers) is about 1 hour, 30 minutes every Sunday (4). Say you go to 50 church services a year. You lose 75 hours of your life every year to church. Since church only (supposedly) does things for the afterlife, it is a negative influence on real life. Those 75 hours add up to three days, three days more sleep, education, video games, gym time, etc. Next, atheists do not have to worry about sinning at all. Since they do not believe in God, so therefore no afterlife, they go total YOLO and swear, drink, dive off cliffs and do a ton with the time they actually have in the real world. So yes, atheists do live a fuller life than theists. Now, they also do not have to worry about suffering because they can always perform abortion, suicide, euthanasia etc. while many theists can not. In final conclusion of this section, I have shown that atheists have a better quality of life with both historical facts and present-day facts. My opponent may prove this argument wrong next round if she wishes to. --Argument 2: Science-- These three words will likely sum up my whole argument, so read closely. Atheism. Promotes. Science. In both a study way (i.e fossils) and a humane way (i.e brain.) First off, I would like to say that atheists promote science. Since they do not believe in Creationism and God, they are pushed to find answers for the world. While God may be the answer for the world, it is needless to say that along the way, many important inventions have been made. For example: Stephen Hawking [5]. He is letting us come closer than ever before to making a big scientific breakthrough.Charles Darwin introduced us to the theory of Evolution, and since, many fossils and artifacts have been dug up to try to prove/disprove Evolution. So, now we know more about past animals and past civilizations. Without atheists, we would be much more advanced. Atheists support science because they want to learn "how the universe was actually created." Here's a quote by Stephen Hawking:“When you look at the vast size of the universe, and how accidental and insignificant human life is in it, that seems most implausible.” -Stephen Hawking (6)I am very caught up in school work right now. So unfortunately, this is all I have to post. Thank you for reading. (1) My Social Studies teacher (2) Bower, Bert. History Alive! The Medieval World and Beyond. United States, ©2001. (3) http://en.wikipedia.org... (4) http://swerve.lifechurch.tv... (5) http://www.superscholar.org...(6) http://www.thebestschools.org...