Belief in an afterlife negatively impacts the world of practical affairs

PRO: 1.No problems here. However, note that this point is merely explains the root cause of belief in the afterlife, and provides no support for the resolution. 2.My opponent isn't establishing a causal relationship here. Yes, faith can have negative consequences, and belief in an afterlife is an indication of faith. However, belief in an afterlife does not result in any of these consequences. The resolution states that belief in the afterlife, not faith, negatively impacts the world of practical affairs. Therefore, this point is totally irrelevant. Belief in the afterlife does not cause faith. Ergo, it does not cause the problems associated with faith. 3."The word ‘better' is so subjective and relative that in this context it can mean nearly anything." The phrase "a better world" arose in your argument. However, I will assume that a better world is marked by a greater amount of utility: "a measure of relative satisfaction [1]. "For the Crusaders, the way to get to heaven and make the world a "better" place was to capture and convert the lands and peoples of the Bible. Etc Inquisitors, Witch-burnings." All of these examples are irrelevant to the debate, as the debate concerns only the present. Of course, the jihadist example is relevant. However, I negate this point on the grounds that jihadist act out of faith, not out of a belief in the afterlife. Hence, that specific belief has no negative influence. My opponent must prove that the jihadist and the religious tyrant act on the basis of belief in the afterlife, which he has not done. If my opponent can prove this, he must present the actual impacts: deaths caused by suicide bombers, policies imposed by religious tyrants. These clash with my case, which I'll discuss later. Examples: 1.Every war will be justified by some method. Nationalism, desire for land, or "righteousness", can easily provide justification for any armed conflict. Furthermore, faith is often used to justify war without belief in an afterlife proving to be of any importance. Essentially, war would exit to the same extent without this belief. 2.The jihadist acts in order to fulfill Allah's will, not in order to achieve an eternal afterlife. It is his "duty", not a manner of getting into Heaven. 3.The Christian would act out of greed regardless of his beliefs. Further, this justification is rarely, if ever, used. Thus, my opponents example is ridiculous, and cannot establish a causal relationship between belief I the afterlife, and the raping of the Earth. CON: My opponent has not negated my point, and thus must show that said belief has a detrimental impact in excess of its positive effects. Religious charity is, in many religions, a necessity for achieving Heaven. Zakah, Islamic charity, comprises the majority of welfare in the Muslim world [2]. My opponent has refuted neither this, nor my point that religions condemn murder, theft, etc., as sins. These sins result in banishment from Heaven. My opponent's examples are rare, and have had far less of an impact than my own. He has yet to prove otherwise. "Incorrect. This debate concerns everyone alive, in a sense, because the irrational beliefs of others - namely the belief in an afterlife - so often do have an impact on the lives of innocent strangers, primarily in a negative way, so I hold." Alright, I was merely ensuing that you weren't limiting the scope of the resolution. [1] http://en.wikipedia.org... [2] http://en.wikipedia.org...