Debate: DO YOU SUPPORT PRESIDENT OBAMAS DECISION TO BUILD A MOSQUE AT GROUND ZERO
Side: No

Science actually doesn't know enough to be conclusive anyway. That's why the word 'theory' is still attached to everything. Don't get me wrong science knows a lot but the truth is that science does NOT know way more than it does know.If you are going to try and play this angle be advised that creationism (intelligent design) has NO peer-reviewed papers that support the idea and make it past the experts in the scientific community. Evolution has hundreds of papers printed every year which support it and work off of it.Try playing this angle with the Earth being spherical (after all, that's only a theory, it could be flat...).Break thru discoveries always come along that make science throw out everything that they thought they knew and cause them to start over. Not really. You see, the way a theory works means that it makes useful predictions about nature. If something comes along that explains things better, it must still be able to account for the evidence that the former theory explains.And when you talk about evolution and hard coded morals i have no idea how you tie them together. Morals and evolution? Survival of the fittest is a good description for evolution.Evolution is a program that intrinsically follows from self-replicating systems with heredity, mutations, variation, and scarce resources. A population that is fit is one which makes best use of its environment.Sometimes genetic fitness means that population which can socialise, work together to find food where a single individual cannot. These mutations pass onto the next generation.Before long you have behaviours ingrained at the genetic level which cause revulsion at the thought of killing a friend. This is because working together with friends in a pack causes everyone to be able to survive better and spread their genes more successfully.Why would evolution care about morality?Group behaviour. If we evolved to be single, alone, we would not have morality.In fact, why did evolution hard code us with an obsession to worship a creator that does not exist?Big brains want to explain the world around them. They imagine a bigger, more powerful man made everything. They pass this along to the next generation. Soon the big man grants wishes, and instructs behaviours, because the big man is useful for organising big groups of people to follow a single person.And you're actually contridicting yourself, according to you the belief in religion has caused more murder and misery in human existance than anything else. Tons of people in here say it is the anti-morality.It hasn't caused more misery than anything else, but it is up there with authoritarianism and greed.Well clearly evolution gave us the religion instinct because we are only products of evolution.Not all feelings we have are evolved at a genetic level, some are ideas that are passed on for thousands of generations. Religion is likely an emergent phenomenon that comes from the desire to explain the unknown, the fear of the world and need to offer sacrifice to control a random nature, and the need to command others for fear of punishment.But now all of the sudden evolution gave us the morality instinct. Which one is it? Did evolution hard code us with both morality and immoral religious beliefs? Why?Morality is likely hard coded because we see it in other animals, transcending the ability to learn culture. Religion seems to be learned by the previous generation, because one can be raised without religion and not want for it. However, religion is natural, the awe we get from nature, the need to explain it, to control it, to appease it, to control others. All of these things likely cause religion to form.