Religion has been, for the most part, a highly negative force in the world.

Firstly, I do not know how much more I have to stress on the fact, that religion is NOT the only cause for violence, sadness etc.... I have mentioned this before, but you continue to refute my arguments based on the assumption that I am blaming religion for all the bad things that have happened to humans : " As introduction, I would say, blaming religions, ideologies, philosophies for bad things happened to human kind is little bit silly (or fallacious)." Secondly, if my opponent is trying to assert that religion is benign, then I would like for him to address the issue I raised in the previous round about the Pope and AIDS. Are you trying to say that a bigoted religious ideology did NOT cause the death of almost 2 million deaths? Do you think that the idea that condoms are 'bad' have nothing to do with catholic belief ? I found it interesting that my opponent takes advantage of the fact that an Atheist ruler was violent to refute my claims about religion, even though I have mentioned that violent people will always do violent things. It is very unfortunate what citizens go through during a dictatorship. This makes dictatorship very dangerous, and blaming atheism(or any religion for that matter) for it, is wrong. This is why I did not mention the fact that Hitler was a Catholic in my leading argument. The idea that Islam is a peaceful religion is a false one. Did you know, that in most Islamic countries the punishment for apostasy is often the death penalty? "Twenty-three Muslim-majority countries, as of 2013, additionally covered apostasy in Islam through their criminal laws. According to critics, punishment for apostasy in Islam is a violation of universal human rights, and an issue of freedom of faith and conscience." https://en.wikipedia.org... The Universal Declaration of Human Rights has included freedom of religion, as part of Basic Human rights. To prove that the recent occurrings in France are derived from religious law, here is a quote from the Quran : " Those who annoy Allah and His Messenger - Allah has cursed them in this World and in the Hereafter, and has prepared for them a humiliating Punishment. Truly, if the Hypocrites, and those in whose hearts is a disease, and those who stir up sedition in the City, desist not, We shall certainly stir thee up against them: Then will they not be able to stay in it as thy neighbours for any length of time: They shall have a curse on them: whenever they are found, they shall be SEIZED AND SLAIN (without mercy). " Quran 33:57"61 " In what way is to seize and slay a peaceful religious ideology? So, I would like to ask my opponent this question : If religion grants an individual the right and moral standard to do an immoral thing (by the standards of the masses), then would we not be better off without it? Again, I am not asserting that religion causes all violence. But, lack of a religious standard of morality will make people actually consider what they are about to do. Blind belief causes people to forget their own moral standards, which is why religion is dangerous. I was shocked when my opponent tried to justify the acts of Osama Bin Laden in an attempt to refute the terrorism argument. I can hardly dignify this argument with a response. I would like a clarification from my opponent as to what he meant. Again, terrorists justify their acts with faith based morality, based on religion. This is my objection. My opponent's rebuttal of the LGBT issue is equally shocking: " In Iran transsexuals are officially recognized, and they can go sex reassignment surgery. As of 2008, Iran carries out more sex change operations than any other nation in the world except for Thailand." This is Iran's status regarding this issue : "Since the 1979 Iranian revolution, the legal code has been based on Islamic Shari'a law. All sexual relations that occur outside a traditional, heterosexual marriage (i.e. sodomy or adultery) are illegal and no legal distinction is made between consensual or non-consensual sodomy. Homosexual relations that occur between consenting adults in private are a crime and carry a maximum punishment of death (though not generally implemented) " "Sodomy (lavat) can in certain circumstances be a crime for which both partners can be punished by death. If the participants are adults, of sound mind and consenting; the method of execution is for the judge to decide." "The punishment for lesbianism (mosahegheh) involving persons who are mature, of sound mind, and consenting, is 50 lashes. If the act is repeated three times and punishment is enforced each time, the death sentence will apply on the fourth occasion. (Articles 127, 129, 130) " "Some human rights activists and opponents of the Iranian regime claim between 4,000 and 6,000 gay men and lesbians have been executed in Iran for crimes related to their sexual orientation since 1979. According to The Boroumand Foundation, there are records of at least 107 executions with charges related to homosexuality between 1979 and 1990. According to Amnesty International, at least 5 people convicted of "homosexual tendencies", three men and two women, were executed in January 1990, as a result of the Iranian government's policy of calling for the execution of those who practice homosexuality" "The Iranian state media have shown their hatred toward homosexuality on many occasions, and no press or other media outlet in Iran is allowed to support LGBT-rights. For example, the Iranian state media has stated that believes homosexuals are deviant individuals who have, for some reason (psychological, social or physiological) deviated from the balanced and natural human condition and need help and support to stop sinking any further into the 'swamp of immorality'. Iran's PressTV has a plagiarised comment policy that expressly forbids homophobia " Why should people who are born different undergo surgery to change their appearance just so they can be acceptable to you? Why do they need to change themselves at all? I don't think my opponent knows that homosexuals also come under the category of LGBT. Does my opponent think homosexuality should be cured with surgery too? The notion that LGBT people should be denied their basic human rights is unacceptable. My opponent says, that : "Political view of each person is influenced by something". I agree. So my question to my opponent is, is there any political, logical, rational, social or medical reason for which you can moralize depriving equal rights to LGBT people? If not, then the only reason that remains, is religion, which is why I am against it. On the education debate, I realize I gave evidence for catholic schools censoring evolution. So here you go. An Islamic school that censors evolution and discriminates the girls from the boys : https://humanism.org.uk... My opponent basically lists most of the branches of science, and claims that they would not exist without Muslims. Science is not derived from just one group of people. The fact that some great scientists were Muslim is irrelevant. In fact, it would be a statistical anomaly if there were no great Islamic scientists throughout history, as Islam is a widely followed religion. The fact that scientific facts contradict religious ideas is one of the main reasons why religious schooling should be prohibited. If some Islamic schools teach evolution as part of the curriculum, then it is a good thing. The fact is that in many of the places, they don't. Evolution is not a religious idea, and my opponent is clearly in favour of scientific thought. So religion should have nothing to do with science education. If science can be taught without the need for religious ideologies, then why risk polluting children's minds with incorrect religious teachings? My opponent says : "Actually, in Islam, education is a commandment from God (and also, seeking medical treatment [9])." Just to remind my opponent, I am not against any particular religion, but all of them is general. So the fact that an Islamic doctrine asks people to take medical treatment is, in the big picture irrelevant, and does not make Islam look any better. But even so, there are a lot of patients worldwide who deny medical treatment for purely religious reasons. You can read an entire paper on this topic here : http://www.religioustolerance.org... Since my opponent says that education is mandated by Islam, I would like to know, if 'god' commanded scientific education or religious education. I would also like to urge my opponent to back his claim that public schools and libraries decreased due to colonization. In my opinion the number of schools, libraries and hospitals are increasing: http://www.euro.who.int... http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com... My opponent has not yet addressed my points about child abuse by parents (home-schooling and bad medical decisions), and I am eager to hear his opinion on these topics.