 Good evening everybody tonight. We're going to be debating is society better off with religion To kick us off. We have Andrew Wilson. So the floor is all yours and thanks for being here Sorry had to unmute myself. Yeah, I appreciate it very much. My name is Andrew Wilson. I'm the host of the Crucible And I'm looking forward to doing this debate tonight. We just do an intro is there, right? Well, yeah, I mean like yeah, this would be your up to 10 minute introduction to explain why Yeah, Skyler Skyler is the challenger. He should be opening. Okay, fair enough. I mean, you know Based on the title it kind of you know, there's gonna be some back-and-forth here So Skyler if you want to open us up, that's cool too up to 10 minutes the floor is all yours Yeah, no, no worried all you usually the affirmative is what takes the first going but I'm happy as the the opposite of that to go So first of all, thank you for hosting modern day debates. Thank you for having me and Andrew Thank you for debating. Uh, so, you know, usually I don't write anything is for these openers. I kind of So I write my bullet points, but I thought tonight I would write I'd start with this And that's that my opponent Andrew a believer in the Christian religion would have to admit like any other Christian His God is the only true God therefore most humans have worshiped false gods throughout human history all of these billions of people believing in false ideas about reality Viewing the world through the lens of their religious beliefs a simple Creation from their imagination and now women don't have rights human beings are prop human being is human beings become property and Humans start mutilating their own genitalia Ironically You're gonna find you know, my position is just a little different from a position like Christianity or Islam, right? They they believe that, you know, all other religions are wrong except for theirs And I just go ahead and just go a step farther and say all those religions that exist are wrong and the reason being is One being if most religious, but let's just say that, you know, most religions are wrong on earth You can only be one true religion. They're gonna be one Truth to the matter if there's a God and you know, what his nature is and what he's about the rules of religion are If that's the case, most people are wrong and when they're wrong, they're believing things that are false about reality things that aren't true and It's not a I would argue. It's not beneficial for society to believe in things that aren't true Because when you believe in things that aren't true, you end up in positions where you think women are property That they shouldn't have rights or they shouldn't be able to vote You discriminate based on sex or you might discriminate based on religion or You might not be some religion. So you may discriminate based on race If your religion tells you so, I mean if we look at I like to kind of go with one specific religion It froze first when I'm focusing on it because I mean I could give bad examples from all the different religions Islam Judaism Even these little smaller religions. They're quite as focused. We don't focused on I should say But I like to kind of focus on one religion at first just to kind of show you that when you know, especially a religion like Christianity, which is I Think objectively contradictory and could not possibly be the case to be true You see what you get and that is Things like slavery being endorsed in their holy book You have genocide endorsed in their holy book You have a culture In their holy book described we're gone tells people to harm little children as revenge for what their their parents actions are All right, this is what believing in false religions Does no, I mean the trick is you know, obviously most people don't even But what the trick is is like you'd really never have a way to kind of maybe demonstrate the true religion So you're kind of stuck as a human being in this this kind of awkward spot If we're gonna save religions better for society, but most people seem to have what the true religion is wrong Why do we want a bunch of people who are wrong about things and then we get disgusting things within our history? You know, I mean I could throw things out like Islam and you know, and you know, how their treatment of the LGBT community it's pretty Kind of the same from a biblical specter for Christianity also. I mean you were to execute them In the Old Testament What else do I want to talk about one of the things that you may hear come up? And you know, it may not but I like to kind of just nip this in the butt early That if there's any type of appeal to mentioning some form of atheist leader like pulpit or Stalin as being a representative Why like a non-religion would be bad for society. I'm simply going to accuse you of a fallacy Which is the association fallacy. This would be something like to give you a couple examples like say I was a say Thomas smart Tom is a Christian. Therefore all smart people are Christian You could say something like Bob's car is fast Bob's car is also red. Therefore My red car is also fast So simply arguing the case that hey there have been atheist leaders who have done atrocious things in the name of No religion wouldn't be it would be a logical fallacy and then also historically you would just be Somewhat incorrect in the sense of the countries Were these leaders like stolen Stalin or Pol Pot? Well, Pol Pot's a whole different situation I wouldn't even get into that quite yet, but Stalin majority of Russia was Christian, right? He just was a brutal dictator who had military power and was able to snuff out as many Christian leaders as he possibly could and and cause all types of harm and that's society But anyways, I went like five minutes. Let me just make sure there's nothing else on my list that I want to cover Hults, you know cults are another thing big problem with religion, right? We have large cults in America like the Jova's witnesses or Mormons Uh that have devastating devastating effects to families and how they live Uh, I've got personal experience with family members who have uh, Unfortunately had their lives ruined By these cults all forms of religion Uh And I think I'm gonna end it there and I'm sure we'll get more into detail is this it's the big ghost Thank you very much Excellent. Well, thank you so much Skyler fiction for your opening statement there I just remind everybody that our guests are linked in the description I got james on fixing up those links for you guys because uh, Uzayin said that there might have been an issue there so I'm gonna send him a message and uh, just remind everybody we are gonna do a q&a at the end of this keep it friendly Keep it civil uh over to you andrew for your up to 10 minute opening. Thanks for being here andrew Yeah, you're welcome. Uh tonight as we delve into this debate Remember the topic is is religion better or worse for society My opponent will humorously enough postulate a society that basically looks like christianity minus god and jesus plus kuhm This will be his perfect society because it's all it always is their perfect society for some reason Why you ask uh because he's a moral anti-realist and he can't offer anything to anybody when it comes for what you should do He doesn't believe in a standard for should do to flesh this out. Does he think that necrophilia is immoral? What about incest if there's no offspring? What about public decency laws like no having sex in your driveway or Uh in the line at walmart. Nope. He doesn't think any of these things are moral. They are just a preference for society That's all a mere preference Even if he's right about christianity and all religions being 100 wrong It doesn't matter because it's a societal glue which holds the foundation together of everything in society And people aren't going to give it up for some dude with a stupid hat So he can yell let's coom nothing means anything. Yay nihilism People need law in order. They need to follow things greater than themselves if we were to have a civilization at all Politics is downwind of culture but culture is downwind of theology A culture's theology is seen everywhere and their buildings their morality their society traditions customs everything Literally, there's no escaping it anywhere on earth for the coom brain anti-realist. Of course. What does culture look like? What pushes the nihilist towards a great acts of architectural beauty or love life or anything? Nothing more than just their preference I'm not here to defend christianity or any other religion. I don't even find that debate to be particularly interesting or compelling Just its side effects those I do find interesting The things that bind entire societies together and give them something surpassing their own preferences That moves them to achieve great things and that thing is religion It's a cornerstone a cornerstone and foundation of everything in basically every society My opponent tonight has the great burden on him to show us His society lacking religion. How do they figure out what's right and wrong? How do they hold everything together? What does kumar land look like? Religious people suffer less mental illness. They're happier and healthier They have less divorce rates better outcomes for children and having an intact family study after study Demonstrates this it seems if paschals wagers on the board Then even our stupid-headed friend over here should probably make that play Because even if he thinks that religions ultimately untrue the outcomes for his children if their religious is likely going to be far better Kind of notations to his opening arguments. Andrew has to admit that god is fake Who cares this debate isn't about which religion is true or false, but if they're better or worse for society He has an argument Where he's talking about believing things that are true is problematic. I'd like to ask him if that's a true statement Why should society value truth when the anti-moralist doesn't even believe anything is true? He says slavery is bad genocides bad harming children's bad Due to religion but non-religious people do all of these things So that's absurd and then he brings up in the same breath a fallacy called the association fallacy And it's like okay. Well if you're going to associate leaders who are atheists and say we can't use them as examples Of a atheist societies where they commit mass genocide and all these other things Then how are you going to tie those things to religious people when secularists are just as guilty? So ultimately why should we do anything? he you know, he mentions Just a bunch of babbling about world leaders religious cults are problematic I would concede that that's true But plenty of cults operate under political prisms and have absolutely nothing to do with religion A cult of personality in fact is one of the largest problems in society has nothing to do at all with religion And with that i'm ready when you guys are Excellent. Well, thank you so much for your opening statement there andrew wilson So everybody I just remind you once again that modern day debate is a neutral debate platform We host debates on science religion politics. You name it. We will have it We are going to kick it into an open discussion and once again If you haven't already hit the like button and if you got questions put them in a q&a and we'll read them at the end All right. Schuyler. We usually kick it over to the other side to open the opening discussion. So, uh, let's do it Yeah, I'm going to start by just telling you right now. We're not having a debate on moral realism versus anti realism I'm for the sake of the argument going to accept That objective morals exist So we're having a debate on whether Uh, well, we're not having better. We're not having enough. I wasn't finished. We're not having a medic, sir We're not having a medic debate. I'm not going to start interrupting me already. I just started interrupting you. What are you going to do about it? I know we're having a i'm not doing a meta debate with you about the debate The debate is the debate. So either make an argument or don't That's I see we're just going to be completely hostile. We're not trying to have engage At all. I'm not your friend. You're already interrupting me. I'm not your buddy. I'm not your pal make an argument Oh, I know I know this is you're a perfect example of what religion does. Yeah, make an argument No, this I am this is why religion's bad for society because we get people because because I told you Let's let him make his point there and then we'll kick it over to Andrew So, uh, what we'll do where you guys, uh, you're both pretty lively here We're gonna do a one minute back and forth and uh, let you guys expound on your ideas because we do want to Flesh out your guy's thoughts. Okay, so uh, skylar one minute for you and I'll let you know when you're getting close to your 10 seconds sure, uh Religion once again Causes harm to society because you believe in things that aren't true like for instance women Uh, shouldn't vote or women shouldn't have rights That's an example. Uh, and that would be objectively wrong Yeah, so why is that problematic that women have uh, no voting rights or that men have no voting rights by the way skylar Why would that be a problem for society if you're not going to if you're not going to allow women to vote That would be objectively morally wrong, right and that would cause negative effects on the society Why would that be objectively morally wrong? Well, it's not about why it's it is objectively morally wrong What makes it objectively morally wrong? No, no, no, we're not actually we're not having a debate on you made the claim You made the claim so back up the claim moral epistemology and moral ontology What makes it wrong? You said it's objectively. I'm granting real morals exist for the sake of debate. Are you saying it isn't wrong? Bro, you made the claim. I didn't make a claim. I am and My morals aren't on debate here. We're talking about if christianity is better for society. Yeah So why so so back up so back up? So yes more why it's because so is it immoral for for everybody everywhere? We're gonna have to mod bro as I say we will have to move into muted rounds if we can't mitigate the interruptions So like I said, um, I do want to have a back and forth that's as open and genuine as we can get it But um, we're gonna have to let each other wrap up our thoughts before we inject Okay, so I know that it's it's tempting but try to hold your thought We're gonna do one minute since we tried to do a little open discussion. It's not working out So uh one minute and we'll put it back to you Schuyler to answer his question and then back to you, Andrew So, uh It's wrong like for instance religion can teach you that slavery is perfectly moral moral like the christian bible does Right owning people against their will is harmful to them uh You may not view it that way right that may not be your position. You may not uh like Have that value in people or care about people to where you don't want them to be harmed You may not find it to be objectively immoral. I'm granting objective morals I'm seeing it's objectively immoral to own people as property slavery religion Because it doesn't know What really is going on has made up ridiculous things like people can own slaves So so so you're saying that secularists can't own slaves No No, they can't own slaves No, I said that they can own slaves Well, then why house us an argument against religion being good or bad for society secularists can do the exact same thing How dumb how dumb are you by the way? Are we just a moderator? I just can't even believe I just can't believe this. This is so low tiered. We we well, you know what I was gonna say We can't just yeah, if you want to do cross examination, that's one thing But you know right now what we're doing is not really getting into the good I'm talking about the name calling is what I'm referring to. What's the argument? We're gonna have a civil debate. Are we gonna have a civil debate? All right, I'll have a civil debate with you. What's the actual argument here? Secularist can own slaves and religious people can own slaves Then how is it that secularism is better for society because religious people and secular people can both own slaves under both purviews of both systems No, what you've done is create a straw man of what I was originally saying What what the damage of religion is is because All of the religion has got it wrong. You guys the religious people make up ridiculous ideas like women don't have rights People can be slaves people can commit genocide against children That's what religion teaches because they don't have the actual access To whatever the true god may be because like I said as a christian You would admit everybody else is wrong except for your particular god. I hear to defend christianity It's it's outside the scope of the debate I'm here to defend whether or not religion is good for society and you're just all you're doing is making Every criticism you've made so far against religion being bad for society Is the same criticism I can make towards secularism being bad for society Secularists can propose all of these things give me a reason why they can't and how they haven't they've done these things What are you talking about man? But in history through it isn't the secularist throughout history that have done these things It's the christians who have done these things. Oh, no, no, it's secularists as well They're secularist leaders most of history is people who really believe in a god who cares if it's most Who cares if it's most so if you're saying religion On society and how it affects if most of the people within the world are religious or believe in a religion And we see the harmful effects from the religion and we also see that's most So now you're saying like well the little bit of people they shouldn't count those little ones We should focus on the smallest percentage. Well, first of all First of all most of the world is religious most of the world's religious and religions continuing to grow Most the world doesn't hold slavery No, most people in the world have never held slaves ever Never that's one two Look at the outcomes for people who are religious as we're looking at these outcomes. I've already told you many of them They're more well-adjusted in society. They do better academically. They're more likely to be happier They have less rates of mental illness Uh nihilism in fact your viewpoint of moral anti-realism that leads to severe depression because people have no purpose This is off topic talking about anti-nihilism or nihilism It's not off topic because it's a societal You don't even know my position. So we didn't bring it up. I didn't bring it up. You're just assuming my position Uh once again, you for every positive story you can bring up about christianity Uh, I could bring a negative one, but that's not the point But I'm going after is what it actually teaches like your specific reason religion Where when you base morality off of god who drowns babies tells human beings to go slice them open Uh tells human beings they can own slaves rewards obedience over actual what any Well, what compared to what jesus told you to do? Uh, it's not the same What I'm gonna just grant all of this because it's irrelevant assuming that all of it's true and christianity is 100 False do christians run around killing babies or is that the secularist who do that sir? Oh, no, no, no Oh, i'm pro of life by the way, but yeah, but who is it? Who is it that does that you're interrupting me you're interrupting you need to answer my It's not it's not relevant. You don't think abortion is relevant for society, huh? You're interrupting me whenever you want me to let me go. Yeah, whenever you're gonna answer the question Yeah, uh My so my personal beliefs once again aren't really relevant what atheists believe really aren't relevant to a debate We're not arguing whether atheists use or better for society We're arguing whether christian views are better for society and christian views come from the bible where God you're not even consistent with your own views because god has doesn't matter. I don't care. I'll just can see I'll just concede. It's not true. It doesn't matter to the debate. Don't you get that yet Okay, so then you just then believing in a then basically my I would go back to once again believing in things that aren't true Aren't good for you Oh, okay. So tell me do you have a any type of metric for what is true? Oh, we're not talking because if you have no metric Again, you're trying to increase that that's not hang on. Yeah, stop. Stop. I'm talking about society If you have no metric for what is true and you postulate a society where untrue things Are not things that we ought to believe in I don't understand how you reconcile that contradiction skylar Well, we can we can actually observe things that are harmful for society and recognize things that aren't good for society Like slavery you would agree slavery is not good for society Well, I mean, I think that that's probably true. Yeah, but again going back to the abortion argument Probably you say that's true and you probably I can envision I can envision some Under some ridiculous hypothetical where you could make some case for slavery. Yes. So can you so can everybody genocide Could you do it with genocide? Well, I don't know I don't maybe in the most ridiculous hypothetical possible. It might be possible to do same with you Sure So, I mean it doesn't even sound like you're articulating with christian beliefs I don't need to I don't need to do that. All I need to do is demonstrate I mean when you talk about your morals you are referencing when you say that you're pro-life you said I'm pro-life Okay, great. You're pro-life. Is it the atheists who are against abortion or is it the christians who are against abortion, sir? There's mo there's lots of atheists. Yeah, mostly that's this is the association. Yeah, they're over the top Okay, so you're literally committing Do you think Do you so do you think do you think inside of your worldview that it's way more christians who are against abortion than it Is secularist and that it's secularist who pushed the notion that fetuses aren't even human beings That's pushed by their ideology not by christian ideology You think that that in and of itself is bad for society or you wouldn't be pro-life So immediately you're siding with christians on this huge This huge issue inside of society now Not a christian you guys you there's nothing in your bible teaches you to be pro-life god isn't pro-life But that's not the that's whether it's hot to them or not Hey, hey you're interrupting me again. So I'd like to be able to just get a word and just there for a second uh once again This doesn't have to do with christianity being beneficial society when you talk about what atheists believe there uh christians who uh try to enact laws based on their personal religion to uh restrict Gaze from doing certain activities to be able to uh Within our society, uh, I wouldn't find that uh more the good either But that's something religion brings through the hateful christians who have these extreme interpretations of the bible Okay, but atheists have also been bigoted towards homosexuals So no no no if you if you levy the criticism and say I can't bring up christianity To point out that most people who are against christianity are christians Then you can't then point at christians and say but most people who are bigoted against homosexuals are also christians They would either both be fallacious or neither one you tell me skylar I I think you're you're missing the point once again. It's the religion that teaches the bigotry of not Accepting homosexuals, right now. Yes, can can people who are not religious Believe also like have like bad feelings towards gays or negative views on gays and their and their particular rights What they should be allowed to do sure not the point, right? Religion is the one through their holy book, right? They told you to escape uh to execute gay people, right now. You're just to the point where you're like, I just want to limit their rights But you know, you're taking a little bit more and scientism brought us eugenics like what's your point? What about ism that we were talking about science? Yeah, again either christian We're talking about religion religion and society and not only that let's dive into this If if any time I make an equation towards weight christians don't do x Atheists mostly do x and your response is that's fallacious You can't say that then you also have to be held to the same exact standard skylar And can't then say because most christians do bad thing and most atheists don't That that's not fallacious. It's the same argument in reverse. Why are you not getting this? No, no, I'm referring to the teachings. You're referring to the amount of people who believe eugenics is a teaching Oh, I don't we weren't talking about eugenics I brought up eugenics. I know it has a counter. Yeah, we're not. Yes. It's a counter I'm not I don't have enough information about eugenics to have a conversation with you. Yes, of course I don't you're fucking dick. You want to try to not be as fucking Like such an asshole. You seem so mad. You're so mad, bro. Calm down No, see now this is what I'm talking about folks if you ever want, you know, this is what jesus talked about By their fruits, you'll know them Go ahead. Yeah, well make an argument make an argument that you can attribute to me That I can't just attribute it right back to secularists You can't do it and anytime you call out any type of fallaciousness or association fallacy Yeah, anytime you call out the fallacy, you would be guilty of the same fallacy by that metric. I would not be How are you not and so how that's an argument for mingling rich How are you not doing this? You have to show it's the case of guilty of this fallacy But it's not even the point of the day straight at the point of the debate is is christianity beneficial for society is religion. Sorry. Sorry. Sorry religion religion, right? Sorry, I was focusing on how christianity has really fucked up things within the world But islam's pretty guilty of it too Judaism is pretty bad that there's not as much Uh, there's not as a large amount of people of Judaism. But yes, the beliefs of christianity were both racist Uh, the most of the south, you know in the united states were christian slave overs Right. These are christians religious people believed owning slaves was fine because they used the bible as a justification This is a fallacy by your metric Your metric is not an argument that it is it's literally an argument to say that you're making a fallacious argument by your standards Your standard is I can't bring up That it's actually secularist who might have uh been pushing for instance slavery if I make that argument You say that's fallacious at the same time you say but I can make the argument that most christians You know push slavery this makes no sense. You can't have it both ways So you're gonna either have to argue it or you're not it's it's one or the other Let me let me read the fallacy again. Uh, let me give you an example Fred, you know, fred is smart Fred is a christian therefore all all people are christian That doesn't logically follow and saying hey like choosing something to be like hey atheists support abortion more than christians atheists support abortion abortion is bad therefore Do you understand it doesn't work? Ah, so that would be like saying christians support Uh, some christians support slavery and slavery bad. So therefore all christians bad. Do you see how that works? Yeah, but that's not the argument i'm making that it that was literally the argument No, no the argument i'm making is that christians believe in false things and from those false things That said we end up with dangerous things like slavery women not will not be able to have the right to vote So it's believing in those things is the argument. I wish you could say on the topic Okay, well then the same exact thing is true for secularists They also believe false things and because they believe false things and teach false things Then people under your metric have to be doing something evil. I guess what we're talking about religion Once it is religion good for society And i'm pointing out by believing in false things and these religious beliefs cause like things like what you support Which is women not being able to have the right to vote or as what was the quote that I heard from you the other day It was I almost had her like write it down. You know some kind of shop Vegan gains ask you do you believe women should have the right to vote or not your answer if men grant it to them? Well, that wasn't my answer. I said i don't see word for word That's a dim answer then exactly as he does today Yeah, I also did something called a qualification where I explained that position And the position is based around the hierarchical structure of how the human race operates and how it operates Is based along these principles specifically that men are the givers of rights to women That has to be that way It can't be any other way because they have no enforcement mechanism outside of men So if the dominant patriarchy expresses that women can't vote, I don't see a problem with it Do you have an argument against that because I don't think you do Is it more is it uh, would it be a more is it a moral for men to stop women from voting? I thought we weren't talking about i'm asking well If you want now we're talking now, we're talking about morals all of a sudden because you can't make an argument Interrupting me once again I think it's fine to talk about the morals because I mean that's kind of the ideas that like are we going to be going in a Direction that we would see is moral, uh, you know given the structure So, uh, let's let's let andrew wrap up his thought there. Skyler and then we'll kick it back to you Yeah, so this is so question. Wasn't so this so this is super simple, right? You keep on pivoting away from the topic while claiming i'm pivoting away I would love to get into whether or not religion is more of a net benefit to society than secularism Or whether or not religion is good for society versus bad for society Yet every single criticism that you bring up can just be applied right back to you Every fallacy you make the claim that i'm making you're making yourself So I don't even understand how this at this point is even a debate to be honest with you Yeah, what's what did you have a question in there somewhere? Yeah, make an argument for why For why without using your own metric for a fallacy and and uh, and then engaging in your your own claimed fallacy For why it isn't religion's bad for society Can you try that again? That's that was an incoherent question What was incoherent about the question? What didn't lead to any kind of it wasn't really a question. It was more of a demand Yeah, do you have do you have arguments? Yeah, I presented them during what's the argument? Tell me the argument religion once again as you believe in false things and believing in false things leads the dangerous things Like you believe women shouldn't be able to vote Uh, it leads the cults it leads to Things that do not benefit the anti science anti Advancement of the human race. I mean it does all of those things And do you think that those same criticisms can be applied to secularism or not? What are their belief? What are you specifically saying they're believes that that secularists can believe in untrue things And do believe in untrue things and so therefore if you're applying that because christianity She teaches things that you think are untrue that if secularism also teaches things that are untrue Secularism would be equally as bad as christianity, right? No because when you're talking about someone may be believing in an untrue thing Right, uh, you know, someone could think about the idea of hey They think their car is going to work right now, but they go out and their car doesn't work, right? But when you're talking about religion teaching untrue things We end up with women with no rights and children with in slavery And why should we have a big category? I think there's a big category for difference What's the category? What's the category difference secularism can also lead? We're not comparing we're not arguing secularism secularism can also lead I'm not even secularists secularists can lead secularism can lead to the same outcomes Well, if it's if you're arguing against religion then you have to replace it with something or nothing You know, I don't that's something or nothing. We don't sound how debates work It does if you're making a prescription for society supposed to be arguing for society you're interrupting You had an affirmative which is religion is better for society, right? That's your job to prove it is better for society I'm showing you counter offers. Why it's not beneficial for society, right? So let's go. I was generous enough in the beginning of this debate, right to open first when traditionally In debates the affirmative goes first, right? I did it for you This is now you're not going to get all the way. We're trying to switch the burden proof This is an informal debate. That's that first and foremost and secondly I did make several arguments that you have not refuted yet for why the the metrics for religious people are better on society Then secularism. I told you that they have better outcomes in almost everything that you could possibly value Better outcomes in all of that Even it doesn't work like that really because homosexuals have the most rights Inside of christian nations. I didn't mention anything about rights. I just said that you didn't have better outcomes if you're gay They do if they're in christian nations They have when they grow up in religious families. No, they don't their families disown them kick them out of the house And by the by the way, do you think that's more of would that be a like that's another thing religion does it teaches you That you know, if your children come out, right kick them out of your house Don't disown your children because they're something that you find morally repunged me Go ahead Okay, so first and foremost You don't need to be any type of religious person to find your child morally repugnant and disown them In fact, the christian religion Arguably would not do this would do everything that they could to reform their child And we know this because we can see the outcomes of children who are in religious families. They do way better They're the one you do Those are the ones who kick out their children. It isn't secular society's kicking out their children from being gay It's the religious ones. Then why are the religious kids doing so well? That's a fact. Why are the religious people doing so well? That fact it is a fact. It's not a fact religious. It's not a fact religious families kick Uh, they're gay kids out of their house. It may be sometimes But also secular Because maybe they're kids are junky. Maybe they're kids of fucking junky That's like missing the point you're not throwing them out because the point is you're throwing them out because they're gay Not because they're a junkie. Yeah, but who cares about the why they're still throwing them out I I do I usually care about the why in context of a lot of things. It's kind of important So so it's only important that their gang got kicked out not the fact that That's if you just you start that with it's only important. That's a that's a straw man What well, I mean, this is your argument. Your argument is to say Christianity bad because they kick out gay kids sometimes like okay Well secularism you can apply this to secularism too. They also kick out their kids whether or not it's for being gay I don't see how that's relevant. I if you don't see how it's the relevant part the gay part when we're talking about religion I I can't help you Well, you need to help me you need to make an argument for how that's the relevant I'll let the audience decide about that. I'm sure that they will decide Speaking of our audience We do have a q&a that we are going to be going into at the end of this discussion Just want to remind you I know you see some spiciness going on the screen here and there but Try to keep your q&a is nice and friendly. So that I'll read them. That's kind of a good qualifier there You fellas It's up to you if we want to keep having another like 10 to 20 minutes of conversation if there's some things you want to flesh out I know you were going into a moral argument skiler Which I think is a fine place to go. So if you wanted to try to go down that route I think that'd be fine if you want to keep it going. I have a question skiler. Were you raised by a single mom? Fuck out of here. I have a lot of questions in the q&a as well. Yes Yeah, you were yeah, no, no, no. No, I wasn't raised by a single mom. Okay. I was just curious What kind of fucking business of that is yours? I mean what what business is it? Is that like the kind of way you roll you want to know personal information about me? I think that it's a trend that I found with people who make stupid arguments that they're often raised by single moms And they have no descriptor for reality whatsoever. It's just something I found association fallacy once again. Yeah, I know But every fallacy I'd be guilty of you It's literally I mean, that's the problem with your whole argument That's why you keep falling in these little traps as you can there's no trap There's nothing you can criticize me for that's not applicable. That's not a confidence on you I know I know I don't know what's happening where when I'm hosting there seems to be talk about mothers recently Is it is it because you know, I it's weird. I don't know what's happening There's there's just keeps happening. It must be Just must be the my or it does ryan I do want to go back and this kind of touches on what i'm talking about right because I think the greatest example The dangers of religion and what it can do to a society Is andrew himself right and the behavior you've seen tonight him name calling being purposely rude It's ironic because like this is what religious people do religion does right they preach one thing They follow a religious leader like jesus and then do the complete opposite of what jesus told you to do Right, so this is a perfect example of the dangers of religion because you get people like andrew Who believe women shouldn't have the right to vote And that's but that's not the association fallacy, right? No, right Of course not. So but but but here we go again. I just got to ask you Since you're the one who badgered me relentlessly on twitter to have this debate I didn't care about you because you're an irrelevant nobody But you begged me to come on here and do this and you didn't even give me a fucking argument and that's where we're at So Like literally that's where we're at. Sure, but so I should have just come on and been super nice to you Yeah, I get it No, the reason I got you on is because this is to me the best way you show people Who people are by asking them questions the audience getting to see how you inter gage with other people Like someone who is you know claiming to be religious, right? How you treat others, right? And I think I treat you exactly how you deserve to be treated And that judgment would just be based on your personal opinion. That's well, how else would I make that judgment? No, no, I'm just pointing out. There's no objective factual reason You know, it wouldn't be like jesus objectively told no, there's there's there's an objective like that No, there's an objective reason is that you you were cloud hungry on twitter And you picked a fight with me and so I came to have one with you and then you're like no be nice though be nice And he didn't even come with an argument because you don't know what you're talking about You haven't made a single argument for how religion is even bad for society not one You just got hung up this entire debate on a fallacy which when applied you're as guilty of as I would be If it's if it's even uh true that you placed it correctly, which it's not Yeah, uh like once again, I mean this is this is you know, this is what I should bring up this good point for those out there Um, there are some good things like religion brings, right? Like the people who actually follow what jesus told you to do and how to treat other people Like that's like I would personally look at as a positive thing christianity, right? But unfortunately during this debate you guys got to exhibit what? uh false religion does like someone who doesn't you know, this is actually like This is what the bible warned about with the kinds of seeds and you know, whether they plant in the ground as jesus gave Therefore we see what kind of seed Mr. Andrew is growing into Right and there's one knot of of jesus christ and religion he claims, but you know, I said he believes in false things Okay, just incoherent Old man ramble. That's fine. We can do that ramble now. What are you man? Let me ask you I'm 39 39 You're you're literally this almost the same age as me. Well, then you need to take a better care of yourself, bro Oh, oh, yeah, that's right. I forgot that as you know, this is one of your religious beliefs that you focus so heavily on people's looks Uh, and this is why you guys are always attacking women you and your Your wife and I guess cuffs and we just have a weird obsession with men who have sex with other men and like Post about it on twitter. Yeah, I know kuma. I know every everything in society needs to be Steal it all from the religious and then subtract god add kumarism. I know that's always that's always where you people want to go With this you don't have anything else. I don't know what kumarism Would you like to define that? Yeah, like, you know cox no sexual morality none of that All the things that you follow it on twitter like you literally reshare all the because it's a culture war Do you understand that and Oftentimes pointing that out putting a spotlight on it is is important. Would would you share pornography to stop pornography? Well, you know, I'm not sharing cookery What are you talking about? No, you're sharing all the I'm sharing a post where somebody claims that they were a cuck and that they enjoy being a cuck And that's not the same as putting a spotlight on somebody being physically cuck. That's insane that Why why do you I mean, but why do you care about people who cares get to the argument? I'm asking you. I'm just a strange fascination to be obsessed. It's a strange fascination that you can't argue That's a strange fascination make an argument. Oh, oh, yeah. Oh, I'll go back to well. I can go back Yeah, I'll go back to the uh argument once again, uh, you know Once again, not believe not knowing our religion is bullshit Uh His religion like anybody other else's religion out there is bullshit Because it's bullshit. Uh, they believe in weird things and false things like women shouldn't be able to vote Slavery is okay. It's okay to kill babies sometimes. This is you know, depending on the religion I mean gays you can throw gays off buildings if you're in islam. It just depends So like I said is religion better for society? No, we should just if we didn't have the religion and all this the this religion teaching you to be bigoted Teaching you you can own slaves teaching you you can commit genocide I don't know maybe some of these religious people wouldn't do it so often Yeah, so again All of the criticisms that he just levied at religion can equally be levied at secularism or whatever brand of anything He decides to come up with they're all equally guilty of doing these things So I don't I don't even know how this is an argument All of these things can be applied to his worldview All of them you can have slaves as secularists secularists have owned slaves Okay, you can believe untrue things as secularists secularists believe untrue things All of these criticisms that he levies at us is the same exact criticisms that we can levy right back and him He has no argument for it. What about the outcomes though? He hasn't responded once to the outcomes of why it is that religious people do better Do better by basically every single metric whether you're secular or not Well, it doesn't matter so you just said everything that I believe I said whatever your worldview doesn't matter Did you correct it after I brought up that I wasn't yeah, whatever it doesn't matter Answer to my argument I'd like to respond It does kind of matter every time you just dismiss someone say it doesn't matter It's not relevant It doesn't actually make it the case that it isn't relevant or something like that Right, you you do this whole rant about the secular world like we're having a debate versus secular Society versus a religious society the debate topic is it does is religion beneficial for society Not a vice versa debate, right? So every time you bring it up. It's completely irrelevant to what you're saying Uh, go ahead if you got a question, I'll answer. I brought up all What about the metrics that I continuously bring up that you still won't speak to one that religious people do better outcome wise Over pretty much every other sector of society. What source do you have for that first one? Which source would you like first? Would you like to start with Pew research center? Are religious people happier healthier? Uh global studies explore these questions. Do you want me to give you the statistics on this? Well, no, just give me a specific one Uh specific one in regards to which thing You're bring you're presenting. Yeah, so So just so the first thing is is there less likely to get you're like trying to get me to give you So the first thing is they're less likely to get divorced. There you go. Is that good or bad? Why why is divorce a bad thing in your view? Well, wait a second. I thought Is it good or bad? Well, why are you asking me my position on good and bad? I don't think it's necessarily bad because we're asking is it better for society or worse? Well, it's not necessarily bad for society to get divorced Do you think that the outcomes for children are better or worse? It doesn't the divorce is just the ask me this is how you treat the children and how you deal with stuff after the divorce Yeah, but what would you say on outcomes generally generally speaking the outcomes for children from divorced homes versus intact homes Which children do you think the outcomes are better for? It's because of what happens after the divorce not the actual divorce you can divorce itself As a because there are lots of people who get out of bad relationships Like people who are in cults like Joe was witness cults and have to escape their husbands, right? Have to get out of places where like their husbands don't believe they should even have rights Right. These are good reasons you should be able to get out of a marriage if your husband's insane or your spouse is insane. So divorce is it? In and of itself a bad thing you're saying that the thing that the way human beings treat divorce afterwards and how they treat each other And they don't put the kids first. That's what you're saying is the bad thing Yeah, okay. So all that leads from the divorce versus having the intact family You had to well here. No, no it does it necessarily entails that because you have a separation of mommy and daddy So if you have a separation of mommy and daddy, they're no longer there together as a unit raising children That's a necessary entailment of divorce. Does every does every divorce equal bad thing The outcomes I said in general are worse. No, that wasn't my question and I answered your question with my answer No, it's a yes or no does not every time. No, right. So then I didn't say it's not in of itself. You're just saying but that's not the divorce thing I know laughing isn't an argument. They're laughing at yourself. I gave you an argument cigarettes Man smokes more. I get well eat more cheeseburgers dude eat more cheeseburgers. I gave you an argument I don't even eat cheeseburgers Let's get back to the topic there guys. Well, it's it's just yeah, so anyways, I don't I don't know where we're at this point He's not he's not really He's not really engaged and he's just I get literally gave you a great argument and you just you won't even respond to it. You just said no It's not actually divorced. It's not an entailment of divorce and the separation of the parents That leads to worse outcome for the children. It's that you know the the After effects of how they how they operate in a necessarily different dynamic. That's the problem. Yes, that's exactly right Okay, so if that's true then the outcomes of people with divorced parents generally for the children That's bad. That's not good for society, right? The reason we have so many problems, especially in our society With single parents is because of how economically bad it is in the united states and how expensive it is to live And how we have so little assistance government programs to help support single mothers or single fathers on their own Well, that's that's super funny that you bring that up because as it turns out Even single moms who have all these government assistance programs available to them still have children who have worse outcomes Then if they're in an intact family unit Who would have thunk it? Yeah, you don't have to be married in order to have more than one person In a unit like marriage isn't the requirement, right? You could have two people Raising a child without that's true The only problem with that is at the number one rate of abuse is when a single woman and stepdadder in the home towards children That's number one rate of abuse. Yeah, those are the circumstances for abuse and children That's you would deal with that. You you deal with that as a different problem. You don't not do that Oh, they're quite there could be negative They're quite intertwined. Yeah, I get I get you're saying that but you can you know, that's maybe you don't think they're intertwined No, no, no, no what I was saying is is you wouldn't stop Couples from having two parents in the household Just because it's more likely something could happen You would work to stop that liking this can happen Like if you if you were living in a neighborhood where it was more likely for you to get robbed You might might be more likely you're gonna go buy a gun and you're gonna step up your defense Right. And if it was more likely that your kids would be you know, have really bad outcomes from you divorcing your wife You would do everything you could not to divorce your wife. It's the same logic, bro Yeah, but yeah, we're you know, you also shouldn't be stuck in a terrible marriage with somebody who believes that You know, even women shouldn't have rights or things like that You why why would that necessarily entail that it's a terrible marriage? You don't think some having someone who's a chauvinistic person who doesn't look at women as someone who could have rights Uh, doesn't look at a human being in the same eyes. God looks at a human being I don't think that you just saying that a man who's chauvinist isn't going to have a happy marriage That seems absurd to me. There seems to be tons of chauvinist with very happy marriages I don't know what the hell you're talking about. You're well, you might be one of them Oh, maybe I don't know how that disputes by point Yeah, I mean, listen, there are some people who like abuse. I guess I mean, I mean, yeah, they may be happy with Abuse they kind of like Well, it's not a sleeve What what makes it abuse it's like mental abuse Like it'd be like me crippling my children by constantly telling them they can't do something or like it's morally wrong Like if I had a gay child and I constantly told them how bad they were and how morally wrong they were Uh, when in reality, that's not really the case that would cause mental Damn just in the same way as when you're talking to a woman and tell them They shouldn't have the same rights as you a man because you are big and tough and can what if your woman doesn't want rights What if she says to you I don't want to vote. I don't want to do any of that shit I just want to stay at home and be a homemaker. Are you being abusive to her then? No, uh, but that's one once again, that's the kind of really that's what religion does It gets people to a point where they give them great outcomes. That's right Yeah, it doesn't give them great outcomes for women. It sure seems to you haven't disputed a single fact that I'm sorry You're saying it gives good outcomes when women don't vote It seems to give good outcomes when women stay at home and men go to work. It seems to be the best I was well adjusted way work. Do you know why I said vote not work? Yeah, even well even with voting if you're looking at what should happen optimally is that's one house one vote The entire family's intact. The whole family gets one vote. That's just your is this just based on your opinion? Not the constitution, of course Well, yes based on the constitution your voting rights are affirmed in the negative One house one. That's yeah, you know, you're one vote one house. No, that's not what I said. What did I say? No, that well, I said Back to me what I said. I don't care what you said that position. You just said you think it should be one vote one house Yeah, that's not That's not a descriptor of is I asked if it was in the constitution. Do you know what the difference is between an It isn't in the constitution what's in the constitution is a negative This is something you just come up with this is your opinion. You're not listening to me. Well, it's the constitution. It's your opinion What's your point? That's just your opinion. The constitution is my opinion Yeah, what what you think the entailment is of the constitution that it gives you an affirmative voting right is incorrect It gives you a negative Voting right. Well, then why do you think you have the right to vote? You don't I didn't say that Well, then why would you argue that women should have that women have the right to vote via the constitution? When they don't you're you're what you're talking about is trying to get women Look at this guy laugh and smoke another so you're admit my sweet revenge will be one day When I don't even have to do anything you're gonna have a heart attack long before I get lung cancer Don't worry about it. Yeah, you look like you think because you look like rock writer. Yeah Does rob writer have heart attacks? Yes Yes, but you associate people the way they look with how they have a heart attack So so you so you get so you get I can't wait till you die You say I can't wait for you to die from smoking and I read and I and I hit yeah, you did That's what you said. I did not say I can't wait for you to die from smoking. That's basically what you said. Yeah That's not what I said. Yeah, okay. Well, what did you say smoke another cigarette? Are you listening are you listening? Yeah, I'm paraphrasing your own in yourself every time you smoke a cigarette Yeah, I got it. You're owning yourself every time you open up that mullet. So Either we uh, either we get back to the subject or we can go into the Q&A for us. We can go to Q&A. I think I've had enough Fun with this guy. All right. All right. I figured like we were getting close to the end We may as well just get all the frustrations off our I mean, maybe that's not even close. We're gonna find out during this Q&A. Just uh, just how juicy this is All right. Well, I want to remind everybody keep your super chats friendly No matter what you're hearing in the debate here tonight, uh, you know some spicy back and forth But that's fine. Um, you know, we expect that every once in a while Uh, so yeah, get your Q&A's in and we're gonna start off five dollars. Oh flamie. Oh Schuyler, what is your defeater for discord in the end of discordanism? You'd have to define what discord is. I don't know what that is Let me look it up very quick because I am not sure what that is either That is uh See we're all little we're all just kind of here like what what is that? Nobody's nobody's ready to define it. Let me see how google defines it All right, uh, is a religion. What is the concept of discordianism is centered on the idea that both order and disorder Are illusions imposed on the universe by human nervous systems and that neither of these illusions of apparent order or disorder Is any more accurate or objectively true than the other sounds like some sort of solipsism But you know, I just have to look more into that. I don't have a answer for that off the top of my head All right, let's continue on uh, stay curious five dollars. Thank you so much Andrew, would you be my slave under a context where slavery is okay? All right, if you could envision some hypothetical like The whole world is going to explode unless you become this guy's slave Then maybe I could entertain something like that, but it would have to be some absurd fucking hypothetical that I couldn't even envision it as being anything realistic But I think that you could come up with bizarre hypotheticals to the extent where not agreeing to them almost seems absurd All right, any thoughts on the other side or you want to continue? Uh, I just I find it funny that any you know the people who supported slavery in the south Uh, they they you know, they they were able to justify it by using the bible Uh, the holy book of christians Yeah, and the people who the people who freed the slaves in the south also were able to justify it using the holy book So I don't know what your point is Well, it shows you that the book is contradictory and it's irrational Oh, it just shows that there's different interpretations of the book. Not that it's irrational I would would interpretation of the bible. Do you where do you how do you fall in those interpretations of slavery? It's it doesn't matter the point the point the point being though is that you can't again Levy that criticism right and knowing that the criticism the opposite direction is just as true. It makes no sense, man That's do you find slavery to be objectively immoral? It that's outside the purview of this debate. No, no, I know but it shows what you're saying something like how a society is run It's run. You would agree that we should run society based on your morals, right? Why again that same criticism would be directed right back at you. Well, no, no, that's a question That was a question. I'm asking you Do you think and run society by our and this this question sent back to you would have the same answer? Which would be yes, right? Yes. Okay. Well then, okay So every criticism So let's let them talk there So every criticism directed at me is just directed right back at you. It's the same exact criticism both ways Yes, I want society to be run by my morals. You just agreed. You also want society to be run by your morals What's your point? No, no, no, that's not what I'm saying. That's what I said Well, I'm trying to articulate So your morals come from your religion, right? Yeah religion, you know, you're arguing religion is better for society Yeah, now your morals though don't say it's objectively a wrong to own slaves That even if that were true, right assuming that that's true It would not matter if the criticism back towards you is you also want your morals to So whose morals do you want? I'm not granting you that I want that. Well, I'm not granting you anything either So you're not going to admit that you're you're not going to admit either that my debates My views on morality and religion aren't up for debate. Is it is christianity better for society? No, it's not I mean religion better for society Your religion is or worse and you're arguing for why it's and you haven't made an argument Yeah, I have I've made multiple arguments for why multiple No, no, I I laid them all out multiple times and you just refuse to engage with them And it's you know why it is It's because it's you anti-moral realists are always the same way It's the first time you've ever really had to take a position ever Right and you can't defend it. You can't really defend it at all You want to keep bringing it back to the biblical basis of what my personal beliefs are Which have nothing to do with the debate at all You can't accept a single criticism For how secularism it can be problematic for society. You just can't you can't even accept it It's a big problem with people like you man Well, let's continue on from there unless you want to respond to that scyler. He did kind of no We can go all right. That's good to say, uh, you know where you implied scyler You might have had wanted to respond But we will continue on there's going to be lots to talk about I'm sure keep your uh super chats coming in Keep them friendly jolly roger ten dollars canadian. Hey, hey, oh canada Coming right at you there jolly roger andrew this debate asks is religion good for society Not religion versus secularism or anything else you aren't defending religion just sidestepping with what aboutism Okay, so Again, if every single criticism that's levied at religion can be levied back at any singular system Then it's already a what aboutism the opening arguments are what aboutism? However, I laid out a compelling case for how the metrics for people's outcomes are far better if they're religious Which is a positive argument and it was never none of it was ever refuted Wasn't even tangled with he didn't even tank it even he didn't even attempt to do it I agree with the person making the comment. It is definitely what aboutism He's trying to are the debate versus secularism versus Uh religion and or whether what would be better for society? It wasn't the debate top That's all I have to say Any wrap up there andrew or just continue I mean, I just I gave tons of carefully uh crafted arguments that have data which back them all up I don't know what else you could possibly want. He didn't even engage with any of them Instead, he wants to go back to how some people in the south Were were racist because christianity is a stupid argument and when applied it made no sense And it still makes no sense all of his criticisms directed at me for christianity directed right back at him For whatever worldview he could possibly postulate under what he considers to be fallacious Just saying all right. Well, let's continue on. Uh, we got lots of super chats coming in now and keeping pouring in everybody We love the questions. Uh, but love it. Oh zion talks. Uh, is moderating tonight Thanks for all you do a zion and he's also put in a super chat for five dollars Andrew why are only 15 percent of the people who believe in abortion who believe abortion should be legal in almost all cases are atheists 85 percent are not atheists reference pure research Yeah, so so this is interesting though You have to look at it based on self-id So almost everybody uh self-id is some form of christian in the united states, right? Not everybody But it's a huge portion You have to look at who are practicing versus non practicing That's where you can really dive into the data and figure this out better And you'll find the more religious a person is the better the outcomes are the more religious They are the less likely they are to be involved in abortion things like this So we would say that just saying a self-id Self-id is christianity without practicing it is is worthless. You can self-id is whatever you want That doesn't mean that you're that thing Uh, I can add to this actually there's uh, when you look at the history Uh, when it comes with abortion and politics and religion Uh, it used to be uh in america that the religions constantly all the different christian dominations constantly fight in each other uh and politically Uh in this country what they ended up doing was rallying around that particular issue of abortion Uh, and this is why years and years later 20 30 years later You see that the it's In in these groups, it isn't just necessarily secular versus christian But you see why abortion is such a large focus and it's because of history and politics And this is why so many christians are so aligned on this. It wasn't always Agreed upon Any thoughts andrew? Yeah, yeah, I don't I don't even I don't even know what he's saying So if you if you look at the history of abortion, especially if you look at what happened in the soviet union Uh pre even pre stalin You start to see that the uptick happened in abortion there, especially I was talking about the united states It became so prevalent. Yeah, but you said the history of abortion. So and it's not just based referring to the united states Yeah, it's it was up for you. Yeah, okay got it But do you understand that eugenics was outsourced from other nations to the united states? It was not a political ideology that we ourselves came up with but rather it was outsourced from other nations Eugenics is an abortion. This is a separate time. Yeah eugenics is abortion You don't know what you're talking about eugenics is when you're you're You'd like hitler try to have a eugenics problem where you try to make a super race of human beings Yeah, and how and that's eugenics. It's not the same thing. It's just yeah So the elimination the elimination of the things that you don't want it's a process In the gene pool would be abortion abortion would be the elimination of things in the gene pool. You don't want But that's what it would be. It's not abortion. Abortion is part of it the process of it It's not the same thing dude. I just got done saying this you're making my argument for me I just got done saying this that yes, it's a it's a portion of eugenics. Of course. It is. How could it not be? All right. Well, let's carry on. Uh, that was our question from ozayan Who's a member of modern day debate? Uh, he he he messaged in the live chat to uh remind me that he doesn't have a wrench Uh, so, uh, I don't know. Maybe that's something we should look into Ronald men do not donka. Sorry. I messed up your name ronald mendonka I should have said that a few times before I uh went to do it two dollars. The least religious countries Are the best That's really vague. So I You know, maybe skylar if you want to kick us off and maybe explain maybe what they might be coming from I'm not sure if that's really specific enough to answer Yeah, I mean it could be looking at more secular societies in europe Uh and seeing what the quality of living compared to somewhere that Whether it be a religious nation maybe in the middle east like an islamic nation or Even compared to the united states with a lot of our christian values where we're at But I think it's just a comparison that a lot of the secular country more secular countries just have a better System of living and it's easier on people. That's what I would guess Okay Uh and over to you andrew. Uh your thoughts on this depends on it depends on what he's he's saying the metrics are for prospering so uh in some nordic nations you could say that um, uh, absolutely their standard of living might be higher But oftentimes that critique doesn't really hold up when you look at the even the um The averages of health inside of the united states. It just depends on the country that you're looking at I know that the nordic nations are always used by secularists as they push it up But kind of the interesting thing which jordan peterson brought up even though i'm not a peterson fan Uh as skylar brings up this critique of voting Is that the kind of the more egalitarian those nations became the less and less women were interested in doing any of the traditional men's jobs I always found that to be kind of fascinating. So Uh, but it depends on the metric So he would have to give me specific metrics and then I could look it up and we could see what the cause for that is But I seriously doubt that it's due to a lack of religion All these different nations did have foundational religions. I don't know. I don't know where he's been but all of them did Thoughts from you skylar. Nope. I don't have anything else to say. It's not really our topic Alrighty, let's continue on uh, and yeah, I see there's some live in this in the live chat Uh, you know, if you got something to ask put it into the q&a and maybe you'll get a maybe you'll get the answer You're looking for or something totally new. Who knows who's rich pernell $1.99 can both parties steal man each other's arguments So let's start with you andrew, uh, can you steal man skylar's position? Well, he didn't really he didn't really give me one, but i'll try to steal man at the best that I possibly can He just essentially said over and over and over again That religion is bad because there's some instances of bigotry that he can be associated with religion Then he claimed that if that was also used as a metric back towards secularism that that's a straw man It's just not a straw man when he's applying the critique to religion made absolutely no sense But that was actually his position. It really was so don't think of being unfair with the straw man But that was just his position All right, and can you steal man andrew skylar? Yeah, just to be clear my position was that religion is bullshit Bullshit people believing in bullshit isn't good because it's not true Some of the true examples you get from believing in bullshit is slavery women not be able to vote Uh, and racism all these kind of things, uh, the steal man his position. He brought up specific, uh, positives that come from religion such as higher, uh Uh, less of uh lesser divorce rates even being a more positive result for the children um, he brought up a Study on it being more positive uh, religion being uh religious people being more happy and living more positive lives I think there might have been one more study brought up But that's the his basic argument though, uh in principle is sometimes religion has good things it does Therefore overall religion is good for society All right, you both satisfied with your seal man No, he didn't steal man my position correctly. All right, he got some chance to clarify So andrew will let you clarify as well Yeah, so my position was that I had both positive arguments for why religion is better for society Which were never refuted never even tangled with and then on top of that um Any of the criticisms that he levied towards me would be equally Uh something that could be levied at any system that he postulated forward as any replacement or absence thereof So that's the proper steel man and that's the actual truth. That's what happened Tingle tingle tingle. All right, saying politics through 30 some things or another andrew Religion had brought way more negative outcomes for most people throughout history secularism is not even comparable when it comes to the amount of people negatively impacted Based schuyler. That's your first super chat. Thanks saying politics. He's coming at you He's right. I agree Well, um any thoughts on that andrew he was coming at you in that It could be it could be possible that more people historically have been affected by the negative outcomes of religion But it you it would equally be true then that more people were affected by the positive outcomes of religion And if you look at the foundational practices of religion and the morality the infrastructure Everything which religion has brought us Um, I would say that people have been much more positively affected than they have negatively affected Which is kind of the point of the argument to begin with Yeah, I would Say that because of religion women didn't get rights in the united states till the 1900s I think it was the 1800s for europe So, yeah, I don't think it had a very positive effect on women Any thoughts andrew Uh, he's he's just simply picking out an isolated situation. So I don't even know how you respond to that It's like at this certain point in history bad thing happened, right? But if you look at kind of the historic record, uh, this is not true We had a christian empires like the byzantine empire for instance Which was definitely a hierarchical patriarchal structure But citizens seemed to do extremely well under those conditions and we see this throughout history We had huge empires where civilization simply flourished under uh under christianity So I don't know where where it kind of comes up with this at all Uh, having rights is different from doing well. You just argued a completely different thing than what I brought up Well, you brought up a thing by the way inherent human rights is a new thing I said you're just picking an isolated point in history. That's it. What does that have to do with anything? We're talking about the question was talking to general woman is what the question was and the pops of outcome The women wasn't very good because they didn't have rights Because of religion until the 1900s in the united states and I think in europe until the 1800s first of all nobody No, almost nobody globally did not just women. It wasn't just a woman problem. Almost nobody had rights What are you talking about? Are you talking about before? I'm talking about what are you talking about? I'm talking about before the year 1900 most people globally had no rights Do you know when rights started coming around? Uh, you know the history of this it depends if you're going to talk about the magna carta the magna carta might not I just brought up. Yeah, that could have been a good starting point for rights But even before that in rome roman citizens had rights Um, at least to at least to some degree. Yes female roman citizens had rights above that of the surf class We didn't have the equal rights of men. They didn't you said now you're slipping and equal That's not what you said you asked about right against equal You think it's you don't think it's positive for people. I don't think it's possible. It's not possible It's possible as to if it would be positive for equal Well, if it's not possible, then how could it be positive? No, you can you know, you can ask hypotheticals man, and And you know, you and this thing where you just like Act silly and mock like it's not an effective argument. It just comes off worse for you. It was a great argument I'm asking you how if it's not if it's not emotional reaction If it's not possible, how do you want me to make the argument? You that's your claim that it's not possible Well, we could get into why it's not possible. Women women literally have the right to vote in this country now Well, you know, they have they have the illusion of a right to vote. That's it. No, no, no, no They they are able to vote. No. First of all, nobody has a right to vote in this country I'm saying that the principle is is that they can vote right and religion took away Their way to vote and they didn't we weren't able to vote because of religion till the 1900s and in the united states 1800s for europe, right? So it's religion that harmed women by not letting them have a choice and all your argument is is like, well, we won't let them So hang on, whether it's moral or not a what hang on for women Do you think that religion the religion is what caused women to not have the vote? No, that's that's what you just said. You just know it's not just code. It's right anything You think that women is what caused women not just women. Yes. Yes. Yes, women were considered property under religion Yes, okay. So to get this right. When do you think that that change? When do you think that that change when do you think that it changed that religion was no longer a factor for giving women rights? I'd like to know this. No, no, no. I said women were considered property under religion. Yeah, that's not my question Answer my question. That's not what my point was. So it's not why are you asking questions? Not I'm asking a question that is based on you. You're making the claim. You have a new question What's your new you made the claim? Here's your claim You you tell me if I got the claim wrong because I'm going to read it back to you as verbatim as I possibly can You claimed that religion was the cause of women not having rights No, well, yes. Yes. Yes. Okay. So it depends on what you're talking about. So when did that change? I don't have rights in Saudi Arabia. Right. Well, when did that change? When did that change? Do you think where religion was suddenly exited the picture and then women got rights because of the lack of religion? Well, what went because when religion had less control over government? That's when it happened Wait, okay. Hang on. So back up You're saying we went to I just want to make sure I got this clear. So you're saying that pre-constitution women had no rights anywhere No, no, no, that's not what I said. I said women were treated as property through religion Okay, but even if I grant that at some points in history, that's true You're not going to get away with denying that. Some points in history. That's true. Sure. And men were treated as property by other men too Yes, this is kind of begging the question though And I'd like to know begging what question and when did the deviation happen? When did the when did the deviation happen? Answer my question I'm not going off on a sidetrack. You just said I beg the question. Are you saying? Let's let Andrew answer. I'm not going to let it go. So you can answer. Yeah, that's fine But you need to answer to my actual question, right? I'm not saying that you're committing the fallacy of question begging I said that you're begging the question. That's what the fallacy. No, that's a normal. That's normative terminology I didn't come to what what question didn't accuse you of a fallacy in my begging So you're what it begs the question then when did the deviation happen? When do you think the deviation happened where religions stopped oppressing women so they're able to get rights? You think that this was during the constitution? No during 1776. Well, it's not just what you know the history of the world It's different time periods for different locations. It's not just one universal answer We're on this date in this year. All of this switched over. It's a slow gradual process Then if that's right, so if that's true, then why would you say that religion was the only cause of the oppression? That makes no sense. I didn't say it was the only cause of the You said they only got rights post religion. That's why you're all you said Let's let scholar speak for a minute. You're strong in my position And this is why you're coming to bad conclusions never used the word only. I said religion teaches things like this religion like your own christianity islam Judaism teaches a homosexuality is abomination. It taught that women Aren't the say like aren't equal to men. This is where you guys get these religious values that you try to Put on society and make laws to where women can't vote Gays don't have the aren't able to marry or marry or adopt children You know, probably the most hilarious thing about this debate Tell me what's all the clips that I get to get out of this if you're saying I didn't say the thing I just said five seconds ago. I didn't say the thing. I just literally got Make me famous make me famous I mean, you're never going to be famous, but you'll be amusing at least you'll be amusing. Yeah, maybe maybe I mean, I only got a couple million views on my channel. But I mean, I probably won't ever have anybody watch me I mean probably not Relatively, I mean, what are you? I did I did go and take a look at you. You're right. You're doing really well You're doing really well. Your lives get three to four hundred views. You're fucking killing it. You know, I quit YouTube like two years ago Right. Yeah, that's probably was a good idea, right? And I come back up to two years and I'm getting a four or five hundred views Well, let's continue live. Yeah Yeah, you could put a bird feeder on YouTube get 500 views, bro. Just just letting you know Yeah, well, yeah, so Yeah, I was just saying well, not everybody does uh I want to sit down and listen to long format but obviously we think it's cool to have these types of discussions And if you think that's cool too, uh, give us a like, uh, I see there's still about 400 bouncing between there Uh, you know in the live chat. Uh, so if you got a second hit the like button because it does help Uh, you know, if you're kind of like me and you're you know waving around in contentious spaces Maybe share it out in those places as well, you know, have a little fun poke the bear Uh, let's continue on with our super chats everybody. Uh, we're having fun Yes, we're just going to get back to the topic there, uh sanders. I gotta open up our Super chats again here. So just bear with me All right, so skylar, uh from stefan, uh, like can and like cannon $5 canadian just because andrew is a hypocrite and does not follow christianity does not mean that christianity is evil That's for you skylar No, no, no, i'm just showing the dangers of it right like when you have people that are hypocrites Right that don't actually follow the religion. They're not really, you know, they're just uh, they have these like weird interpretations scripture Um, that are completely opposite of jesus. Why he's dangerous is the way he treats people the way he wants to restrict He's mean right andrew's mean and i said restrict rights. He's mean restrict rights Yeah, but i mean you would like to restrict what you do you ignore the important part Oh, so i see the mockery is debate Would you see so you think all you have like do you think that people should have the unlimited right to own a gun Should they have bazookas and grenade launchers? I just think it's funny that you you resort to mockery to make arguments Instead of actually making your I just made an argument. Are you gonna respond to it? I think I also believe that Actually andrew that was a question. I think you also wasn't an argument I think you also want to restrict that's a statement. That's an assertion. Yeah, but I can demonstrate this Do you want to restrict people from? Yeah, I think you want to do that and if you do want to do that then you want to restrict fucking rights, don't you Do you think it's through restricting your rights of human beings that treat them like second-class citizens is the same as Uh, it's restricting the rights somebody to own a bazooka I think I think that was on a level I think that we can dive into it and figure out what sorts of rights we want to see restricted because we're not good for society We don't have to dive into it. Yeah, we do. We do like slavery like Making sure people aren't slaves and people owning bazookas, right? They're not the same category They're in the same category of rights Right. Yeah, and you would say that they're debatable. Yeah, that well, that's right Because I think people I think people owning bazooka is probably okay. So it would be debatable, right? Is it I was talking about slavery. It's debatable. Yeah, I know, but but I'm just I know the category of rights. Do you understand? Like Owning a bazooka with owning a human being and that we can have a debate about that. That's Just not my position. I'm not gonna share. Okay. I don't share my bad Do you know do you know what a category is like rights are a category? Once again, you're you're talking over the point, right? It's not about It's about how it's it's once again, you're saying that like Uh, legislating just evading. Oh, you're saying that I once again, you're saying that legislating somebody not owning another person Is the same thing is legislating. Someone shouldn't own a bazooka. No, I'm just saying that they're both in the same category of rights There do you have a right to own a bazooka? Uh, well, no, but you have a right to own an ar-15 So it's not a right then But I have a right. Well, then nothing. Well, then nothing's all right. No, no, it's a slavery is abolished under the constitution So It's not I'm sorry, you just said it wasn't in the constitution. It wasn't constitutional. You just said that not me Yeah, that's my claim. My claim is that rights are limited constantly. That's the claim Yeah, you're past the point and so having unfettered so having unfettered access to rights is insane And you would agree that that's you're talking about denying human being rights Not you're not you to think that you actually are being oh really? So should prisoners should prisoners have guns on the same thing should should people be able to own slaves? No, should people be able to own guns and no, I agree that we should So you're comparing that like so let we we have laws but laws aren't necessarily rights in the same category Okay, yes, both of these are socially constructed. Yes, both of them. Yes, I agree. And they're both based on subjective values, right? But they have different categories So you have different categorization for human rights or what you would consider a human right or what you would consider a general right So if we're talking about the constitution, especially the second amendment, which would be in the constitution Right and let's say the 19th amendment, which would be in the constitution would be under the same categorization of rights You understand that So you're saying that if we take away you're talking to me like a child like you get under my skin. It doesn't do it Well, I mean I kind of have to I mean just I just don't understand Like why be a christian if you don't even act like follow jesus you think this says nothing to do with the debate Yeah, I'm just genuinely i'm gonna genuinely give you an answer. I'm genuinely curious people people people like you moral anti-realist you go out You want me to answer the question? I'm asking. I'm not even talking about your position. No, no, no, you just said you're an anti-moral realist Like that's you are yeah, but that you just said you weren't talking about my position I'm not talking about your position time out. Okay. So here's the question once again And I'm trying to why as a christian do you not like emulate what jesus told you to do first of all I don't think that what jesus said was be a sse and take unfettered amounts of bullshit from fat people on the internet Who are chasing you're for clout and you define what you mean by yes you a person who will not that's a well That's not a defa that's not a definition. That's an example Yeah, a definition would be you know the difference between people people with people with limited masculine Qualities who act in the same way that a woman would act in any given situation Well, how does a woman? How would a woman act in that context when you're talking about well They would act when a non masculine trait of being as evasive as possible And not answering to any of the arguments. So jesus told you to emulate like a man is what you're saying that no I'm like jesus. What i'm saying is that uh, when it comes to masculinity Christianity and masculinity have always gone hand in hand. I don't know where you get this idea Where you get that from where do I don't know was jesus was jesus rolling people in a temple? Was he flipping over tables? Was he whipping people because he did all of those things? Well, you're not god, right? What does that have to do with the price of tea in china the way he told me to do the price of tea in secular china Let me explain the way he told you to act is different than how god can act He told you to be gentle He told you to turn the other cheek. Do you know what the osis to love your enemy? Do you know what the osis told you to show? Yeah, what's the osis you to show love? What's the osis not you call names? You're like, what's the point of calling me fat? Is it just to be me? It's a descriptive true statement and you just got done saying you just got done saying that I need to tell the truth So I did I agree. Let's say that I agree. I'm fat, right? Yeah, so the best Christian thing for me to do Andrews I'm just a big question. Just don't ask me questions and then not let me answer them I'm doing well. I'm trying to get the question out here So my question is you called me that and I'm trying to like was your goal to hurt my feelings Was it to try to be mean like was it what was the goal of stating a fact? Like that So I'm going to answer your question, but you have to be quiet long enough for me to finish the answer I'd rather just get to the actual answer instead of talking about the drama Okay, so I may just answer the question instead of talking about the answer So here's so here's the answer to the question very simple you Went out of your way to be as agitating and irritating as possible And so when I came on here, right? Because you wanted to make sure you was irritating as possible Bro, let me finish my answer, okay You you you've been you've been hounding me hounding me on twitter I don't even know who the fuck you are about doing this debate on christianity, which I don't care about I've never cared about it. Not even important to me. It's not a debate on christianity. It's on religion. I know Okay, so anyway in any case Um, so you were just cloud hungry you came you came after me as much as you could So we got a proposition together and here I am to do the debate But I don't like you and I think you're a scumbag And so that's why I'm meanzy to you because all you did was come on here with no arguments And you wrote a strongly worded letter to the manager A strongly worded letter to the manager about how christianity makes you feel bad because at some points in history They did bad thanks to some people. That was your whole argument worthless waste to everybody's time and energy That's why I mean to you skyler. Yeah, listen. No, I think you're meaning because you enjoy it Um, but you can justify it however you like The reality is the reason why we're debating this topic about religion is because I asked you to defend defend your actual religious hateful beliefs about the lgbt Uh community and gay community, but you refused to and in fact, I had to literally Get you to a point where you gave me three choices of what to debate topic, right? And I had to select from them Right and then when I asked, hey, can we keep it? Can we go from is religion good for society? I'm sorry And I said can we focus more in christianity because that is actually your position the christian position And it seems like as a christian you'd want to you know show people how it's good for society But you refuse you said we have to just I did show it. I'm not done yet. I did show it I'm not done. Uh, so once again, I asked you to debate that specific topic Right you're talking about those things like I need cloud Sure, I get it. I'm sorry. I I don't need any cloud, right? But doing this way longer than you have if you have like I said once again you say You're a christian, but you you don't represent jesus all you make up this weird new definition has to do a masculine any femininity It's just this weird woman hating Thing you got in you. I don't know what happened to you man, but god bless you go ahead Okay, so in any case Uh, like I stated this or are we going to like like I stated to you before I'm gonna go after this again If he does this yeah, I'm gonna do it. So it like I said before Uh, because you're a moral anti-realist There was no point in having any contention with you to begin with you have no prescriptions for anything because you're a moral Anti-realist you don't have anything you have nothing to offer anybody So what's the point in even engaging the only way I was gonna engage is if you had a position and it's not worth No, no, no, I didn't say in this debate. I'm talking about the lead-up to the debate. This is now the meta You didn't know my position. Oh, yeah, I did of course I did How do you know my position because you said that you're a moral anti-realist I did not to you You did to james and james d.m. Me that you're a moral anti-realist, which I like to see the games Yeah, so it wasn't yeah. No, that's fine. So james before and you I was anti-realist Okay, so it wasn't yeah, that makes more sense james. Well, but you recognize we weren't debating anti-realism versus realism Yeah, I understand that but I I'm giving you the I'm giving you the I'm giving you for the sake of the debate Yeah, and you were and the reason I and the reason I granted them is that I would I would imagine As someone who believes in objective moral values that they come from your religion that you would feel those were positive on society Uh, that's why I was but but those but these objective moral values you have Say that women can be property and don't shouldn't have rights that women are inferior to men That men should Uh, where did you get the idea that I believe that women are inferior to men? Uh, by your post saying that you will not allow them to vote. That doesn't mean that they're inferior So, why would you not allow them to vote? What why would that's not my question? You need to demonstrate how they're inferior by them not voting and you don't think women are inferior to men No No, okay No, so why why can't you why shouldn't they be able to vote because it's not a good idea and I can demonstrate this But why isn't a good idea explained because because women tend to vote for protections Versus freedoms and that's your highest value. That would be an inferior thing No, it wouldn't be inferiority. It would you know, you would be saying that they're looking at different priorities No, because of their nature who they are they look at different priorities and they'll vote for the wrong thing That is looking at them as inferior. No, it's not looking at them inferior It's looking at them. It's looking at it's looking at their trends And you would you disagree that this is the trend for how women vote or no The data is just a way of acknowledging what you're saying Right, you're saying women are No, no, that's the other type this time. Yeah, I agree like if you're saying, hey, the data shows That women will vote the wrong way because of their nature, right all that's doing is Backing your argument, which is that women are inferior to men because okay because of their nature, right? So so children are inferior to women and men because they can't vote You're measuring Whatever the metric is that you're using if it was like fighting physically fighting. Yeah, children are gonna be inferior to an adult Yeah, that's not what i'm asking you though You gotta explain you have to shut up. Let's let them speak Now you're complaining about me interrupting you can't talk Over me. Oh, you over talked to me so much and now you're complaining kind of hypocritical There's been a lot of over talking And Andrew's done quite a bit of it so she's just not complained about That's why I didn't want to inject every couple of seconds because I I realized there was going to be quite a bit across talk The way you guys were interacting right from the start. So let's so let's try this again By your whatever your metrics are for inferiority that you're applying to why you think that it is that because I say women Are not inferior. I just think that they vote incorrectly or their trends vote Is bad for the nation you claim that that's inferior vote that that means that I think they're inferior vote Incorrect children children can't vote either answer the question vote incorrectly by what's because based on the outcomes of what they vote for It's usually based around protection They want protection wrong to vote for protection Because generally speaking you want the outcome to be more towards human freedom if you want the best results for society That's why I mean that's an opinion Well, yeah, of course, it's an opinion. What else what else could it be? It's your opinion women should vote even objective It's your opinion. What else should it be? It's your opinion women should talk like a moral realist You actually talk like a moral subjectivist All right, let's wrap up that one and get to our next question. You're the entire We have a whole lot of questions. So start with your jab and these guys are these guys are really boxing on modern day debate tonight So in defense of the gospel 999. Thank you so much for your super chat. If slavery is always wrong Why didn't any atheist intellectual ever question? It wasn't until William Wilber force a christian because of his faith in god started the abolition abolitionist movement in britain thoughts gents Well, I don't know which one do you want to start here? so, uh I guess the first part of it if slavery is always wrong. Why didn't any atheist intellectual ever question it Well, okay. So this is simple for the same exact reason My opponent's been arguing for rights the whole time and then now suddenly he doesn't care about rights anymore, right? They don't have any basis atheists themselves. They have to they have to simply adopt Uh, the religious format for morality. They don't really have a choice because it can't justify anything You just say I just think that it's true. So it's true. That's it. They have no way to justify anything They just borrow from the religious over and over and over again. That's all that they do Like this brand new idea in skyler's head of equality. This is a new idea. This wasn't postulated by atheists is absurd Just like the super chatter just got done explaining. Hey, listen Uh, these were christians who went out of their way to make an abolishment of slavery, which is true Say and where were the atheists? Where were the atheists raging about it? They weren't anywhere they weren't anywhere and they never have been they they can't they don't have Their own moral conceptions. That's a brand new thing. It's not historically accurate Yeah, I mean listen, you can claim that atheists borrow morals from christianity Uh, you guys borrow them from bronze not bronze age Ancient samaria is basically what you guys borrow your moral values from Maybe based on the biblical text. Yeah, so what? Uh, you see when you interrupt me It kind of it kind of helps you miss the point, right? Because you're not listening and trying to understand what i'm saying to you just ramble dude And then you want you to get right to the point make ad hominems or just rambling. Yeah Like you don't you're not really in an intellectual debate. You're just more in the shit talking is what it seems like Yeah, well, you're not you're not Really prefer shit talking over actually a lot of people to people like you you're not worth debating You're just some scumbag, right? You just have scumbag Without hyper analyzing each other here Let's continue on with our questions and try to keep it relevant for the sake of our audience I mean it does show you what once again, I'll go back to the keep it on topic That this is the kind of hatred that comes from religion and anger Uh that comes from it, right? This toxicity comes from religion. That's why you get places like the west borough baptist church Uh, you get awful people who are Calvinists who believe god ordains uh Child molestation and all these kind of things. So yeah, I mean I just once again just on you can just see how uh How people act that are religious like Andrew and this should tell you all about the dangers of religion All right, any thoughts Andrew before we go to the next question Yeah, and if you want to see what a feminized society looks like with overly whiny bitches Look no further than my opponent who just literally took this entire debate to make sure that he wrote A long gated letter to the manager. That's literally just bitched half the debate. That's the irony of what you're saying right now Let's try my hypocrite. You literally just bitched half the debate about me. You made personal attacks All right, once again, we're gonna try not to do any meta analysis of the debate If you guys want to do like a debate after show and kind of hyper analyze what was discussed here tonight You feel welcome and while I say that uh hannah or a surgeon or any of our discord members That are in the live chat right now if you could link our discord Because i'm going to be hanging out in the religion vc after this Uh where we'll have a little you know pow wow about this whole conversation probably so if you're not a part of the modern day discord Uh, hopefully somebody will tag it in there. So let's continue on Hughes rich pernell 499. Thank you so much For schuyler, do you think america would be better off if the founding fathers didn't use religion to escape tyranny and promote independence Read that one more time for me. I'm sorry. Okay. Found the eye. Yep. That's all right Do you think america would be better off if the founding fathers didn't use religion to escape tyranny and promote independence? I don't know. It's a good question. I don't know if america would be better off I don't know if I have enough information to make a Judgment on that. I will say that a lot of the Founding fathers were deist and didn't have share some of these wild religious beliefs about That some of the christians or muslims or any of the other major religions Believe believe in but yeah, that's all I was saying All right. Any thoughts on the other side? Yeah, so most of the founders in fact were not deist there was thousands of contributors to the us constitution Not just the people who ended up Eventually signing it. That's one and two Of course, you wouldn't even have a nation if it wasn't for anglicans escaping from persecution So I would say that's pretty pivotal to be honest with you. I don't know how my opponent needed more information for that But yeah, that was pivotal Alrighty, well, let's continue on and it looks like schuyler's taking uh Oh, he's back. There he is So, yeah, I have a last statement about something I was going to ask No, it's all good. Well, I continue on with our super chats and keep them coming in everybody Uh, we'll keep this rolling as you keep the questions coming I remember to hit the like if you like what we're doing Engage paragon five dollars. I almost super chatted to schuyler to ask To uh to schuyler to stop body Slamming this poor cigarette Worship her. This is like sel versus krillin rock on schuyler. So I got a fan out there Thinking that you did a wwe slam here under his claws, man. Thank you. Yeah. Well, thank you for your super chat It's always nice. Uh, when people are just uh here to say yay for a speaker. That's cool, too Uh, so keep the super chats friendly everybody non expert five dollars. What is schuyler's objective? Not personal justification for good What is my say that again? What is my objective justification for good? Not personal For good, I don't justification for what good good the general idea of what good is is what is that what they're asking? I don't know I think so. Yeah. What is schuyler's objective justification for good? Well, I I think is what they mean. Just I don't know. Yeah, I don't know what that would mean I don't know what they want me to show or demonstrate or There are the positions we were arguing today uh No, no, I really I don't really know how I would Let's go eat that for them All right. Well, uh, let's continue on there And they answer that question. Um, he doesn't have one. That's that's why he evaded the the question Just like he evades all questions. Would you like to ask the question in a different way? Go ahead? Yeah, he wants to know what your what your justification is for morality Oh, so what my justification for morality is I don't justify morality, right? So you don't have one No, no, no, I have a moral system. I just know you have no justification for morality. Well, that's a claim That's what you just said. No, no, no, I said, I don't justify my morality I don't try to justify so then you don't have a justification No, no, no, there doesn't follow. I could have a justification. Well, what is it? I don't try to justify it to people. What would it? Why would I don't have one? Are you saying demonstrate it? Is that what you mean by justify it? Like show it to be no, he's like, what are you asking? Just he asked he asked can you justify your morality? He said I don't justify morality So therefore you don't have justification for morality would I justify my morality? Listen, I just explained this man. There's nothing no, no, no, that's not what you just say Yeah, that's what I just said. I just explained it just to buy justified by what standard Who cares the standard he asked you to point he asked you if you have a justification you said no You said no Who cares what the standard is when you're asking to judge like it's like who cares what the facts are when you're using The data to find out what the facts it's an entailment dude if you say I don't have one you don't have one I know that's that's not what that means. That's what that means. You need to learn a little philosophy I promise you philosophically if you say I don't All you want your promises mean shit to me. Yeah, so philosophy 101 Never answer questions. I have no reason to listen. Run away from your own positions. Let's continue on fellas You just say promise me is not an argument, man. Let's continue on. We got lots of super chats. Keep them pouring in everybody We are getting into some juicy stuff here tonight Kraken's call five dollars Was the religion andrew is citing the same throughout history The same did the rules never change No, of course they change we're talking about religion in general. So it's not just christianity. It's not just You know muslims. It's not just modern-day religion. We're saying religion in general And I had of course in a historic lens. Uh, that's changed many many many many many times Religion has been more harmful to human society at some points and less harmful, right? The most harmful side is when they try to take away Uh, or kill gay people or when they try to Take away women's rights or don't want they want women to be property bought and sold Uh, our slaves, right? That's like the really bad parts Uh, but sometimes, you know, during history it was a little better All right, well like now seems like a good place to cut that one there and we'll continue on Non expert for five dollars. Thanks non expert for your super chat Skyler morbidly obese people are unhealthy. Is is this true or an association fallacy? I feel like we can skip that one because we But I'll answer it's a fact. Yeah morbidly obese people is a fact It wouldn't be a fallacy yet If you present evidence and you're actually stating something as a fact, right a fact, right? Um, but once again, this is it's ironic The reason I love this just once again goes to prove How can religion can cause you to be so toxic? Right like to where you just focus on people's looks You're no longer about arguing ideas or arguing differences or coming to understandings It's just an anger and hatred towards the other side So we're now it's it's perfectly moral. Okay for you just to to talk about someone's appearance Uh, so I just that's more the dangers of religion Yeah, why would that be bad talk about someone's appearance? Well, you don't have to think it's bad. That's the point. You don't think it's bad Yeah, why would it be bad though because you just said it was that's that's well You don't believe it's bad or you I asked you a question I know but I'm not going to argue with you something that you don't if you agree with you just said it You just I know it's not that's not we're arguing real smile. Listen to what I'm saying to you You disagree that it is uh immoral. Why would you ask me a question? Because you're asking me about morals. I'm asking you a question because you made the statement. It's bad Oh, jeez you dodge questions over and over. Let's let you uh, let's let's let skyler ask a question And we're gonna try to focus on that so skyler can you ask your question and then we'll kick it over to andrew to answer I don't even I don't remember we were at to be honest with him. He keeps jumping in so much and can't stay on point Oh, okay. You want to ask the question again? Go ahead. I'll let him ask me the question All right, seems we've all we've we're all running on a blank here. That's fine Running on a blank for what? I don't know I was allowing you to I was allowing you to ask the next. Oh, yeah So so this was simple So you said that making fun of someone's appearance is bad and I'm asking you why it's bad Sure, it harms them And is harm the something we should value I believe so Yeah, why? Because if you have that be well, no because empathy. I have empathy and that makes me not want to harm people Okay, so do you think that you have empathy? Do you not want to harm people? I think I have empathy. Sure Sure, so you wouldn't want to harm somebody. Oh, no, I don't think that that in is an entailment that if you have empathy That means no harm. So hard. So wait a minute. No harming people I'm gonna give you the example I have an example. No, I want an answer to my question. I'm trying to give you this was the original question I was asking you is it immoral to harm people? No, not always, of course not. No, no, is it immoral to harm people by verbally calling them names? No, not always, of course not. Yeah, this just shows you what you value. Do you know what not always means? Do you know what not? No, no, no, I know I get it. Yeah, but it's not always mean Can you tell me not all the time? Yeah, not all the time. So sometimes it's okay So sometimes it would be okay then right this is part of the Andrew You know how you interact with people you figure you would want to have like some type of charity Some type of want and desire being as maximum charitable as I can be You're really not though name calling resorting to name calling isn't you're really mad about that Well, let's just say I am right What's the problem with that being upset that someone's name calling? There's no problem I think I think it's hilarious. So okay. So you think it's funny really? So there's no problem with calling someone names There's no problem with you trying to hurt their feelings or whatever sometimes. I'm serious Well, no, I'm talking about this particular. I'm talking about calling. No and this in this debate is especially was justified. Yeah Well, I mean, I mean you don't have any foundation Right foundation for morality I don't have any foundation for morality. Yes, of course. I do. No, you don't Show that it's the case that I have a foundation for morality would be my belief in god That would be my foundation. That's just you saying you have a belief show that it's the case that it exists Yeah, but the criticism applies to you too No, I didn't make a claim about them Having an objective moral system Okay, you made the claim That I have no foundation for my moral system, right? Okay, so I so if I say god the bible Let me just speak there. So then so then if I say my foundation is god Then I've just demonstrated I have a foundation now you can disagree. See this is philosophy You can disagree with that foundation or you could say that that foundation is not justified or any number of different things But you can't say I didn't give you a foundation because I did No, no, no, what I meant is you don't have a real foundation. It's an imaginary one you created Well, you don't have any foundation. So there's that Well, that would be you don't even believe in a foundation. You don't believe in anything But that's not really dealing with what I just said and I'm not a nihilist actually um So not the case All right, so you misrepresented me and you got your own I mean, I think you are a nihilist. So I mean you can think whatever you want. It doesn't make it the case I mean, I know you think this is the way you argue you think by just stating your beliefs It makes it true, but that's not a good argument I mean, so you say that you're not a nihilist Do you think that there's any such thing as truth whatsoever that you could actually know truth? Sure, I know I'm not the christian god. Okay. How do you know that? Well by definition if I were the christian god, I'd know it and if I were saying I wasn't the christian god watch I'm not the christian god If I were the christian god, I'd be lying because how do you know we should you how do you know? Saying we don't know what the christian god. I'm asking you how you know, we should use definitions What do you know that so we're moving it to talking about well, I'm just asking you No, no, you're not asking you're moving the conversation to a weird place. I'm asking whether we should use definitions I'm asking if you can know knowledge Can you know and I and I just gave you an example of one and you agree? Yeah, but in previous videos that you've made you've said that there's always a threshold Where you can't really know. I just showed you that I have knowledge. So then were you lying? I just demonstrated I just I don't agree with your representation of my older videos. Well, that's what you said. You said you can't know That's what your second. Oh, no, no. No, he's he just said he said that I said this I don't believe you. I think you're lying Okay, you can say that people can go watch. Yes, I can but I just demonstrated I have knowledge and you admitted it. So the viewpoint is kind of mute Well, the reason I was going to hand it to Andrew is because uh, it was directed towards Andrew So, uh, we're going to let him expound his thoughts on that and then we'll try to get to the next one here Yeah, so restate the question real quick. Uh, sure thing So was the religion Andrew is citing the same throughout history the same did the rules never change? Yeah, so we're reciting all reciting all religions. Oh, sorry. No, this one was about the uh, this one was to you Schuyler. This was the one about The association fallacy there Um, so yeah, let's just try to move on from there then I guess. Okay. Um Angie bangie five dollars canadian to schuyler. What is it about homosexuality that it deserves respect? How are men equal to women? Imagine we rephrase this question, right and said what is it about being black that makes a human being? Uh, a black person able to be respectable or we just change it. What about being a woman? Makes a human being, uh, respectable. This is a silly question Right, uh, the gay people are just i'm you're up. You're interrupting the middle of my sentence, man You won't hear the answer if you interrupt it. You're not gonna give an answer. You're just gonna prowl So this is so I was just yeah, so uh, what's for all, uh Gay people are just people who have a sexual attraction to the same sex That's it It's the only difference between them and any other human being and thinking that you're going to put them in jail Or prison or execute them because the religion tells you so Is pure insanity and that's the problem I have with it Are you andrew? Yeah, so I mean that wasn't really an answer for why it's just he just kind of reasserted that think bad because think bad That's it I guess say I guess he doesn't think it's bad to throw gay people in prison. It's not yeah I guess you should make an argument. Do you do you think it would be immoral to Don't ask me questions to answer the question for once. I already answered the question You didn't you didn't you just said think that because think bad give it a real answer Ashley answer it. I said it's immoral because it harms them So you're utilitarian That's what you believe you said I didn't answer the question. You said I didn't answer question Okay. Well, then You've got to keep up with what I'm saying homosexuality also. Let's let's let's let's answer it there Well, this is a two-part question. So uh, schuyler 15 seconds, uh, what is it about homosexuality that it deserves respect? So if you could sum up your idea in like 15 Sure, the easiest we'll kick it over. The easiest thing is that because homosexuals are human beings You should show them respect and kindness and they do the thing. Jesus told you to do let me step in Let me give you a positive about religion Do the thing Jesus told you to be kind of people gentle soft-spoken love them love your enemy uh Yeah, we'll be better for society Okay, uh, did you want to move to the second part of the question or did you have thoughts Andrew? Uh, yeah, so I would I would claim the opposite I would say that uh People's sexuality doesn't entitle them to any sort of respect or anything anything like that whatsoever I think that uh, rather we should have some sort of set values outside of the action of sexual intercourse to give people any Sort of protections for anything. I think it's uh, it's kind of absurd to value a person just based on their sexual selection That seems stupid to me whether they're straight gay or whatever Well, the the irony is like He's he's trying to make the one should I would imagine make the argument is that we should just value all people But it's it's the christians and the religious people the islamic the christian religions that are going after and targeting The people are not leaving them alone like trying to put them in reconversion therapy Get them to change the prey the gay away and mentally harming them. Yeah, but there's good reasons behind those things Yeah, I know you probably believe there's good reasons for gay conversion therapy Yeah, there is good reasons for it. Yeah. Yes. Yeah, because you believe fundamentally being gay is Being it is there's something wrong with you Well, I mean it was classified as a mental illness forever and ever but By religious people right people who had the christian that were christian No, first of all what happened and I can give you the uh, the former president of the apa saying this on records Was he a christian? He no, he wasn't and he claimed 100 that the apa had been infested with homosexual advocates And that's the reason that they declassified us What? Yeah, you say it's the negative thing. I'm trying to understand what the negative. What's the bad? What is it that I just responded? Well, I don't you're saying there was advocates, but I'm trying to ask what is it the bad thing that gay people do in your mind What is it that's wrong about being gay? I said that there's good reasons for you to have conversion therapy didn't make a claim on bad good or otherwise I mean you would why would you want to convert somebody if maybe maybe if they just made perhaps they could even be Uh, well more well adjusted in society if they weren't homosexuals. Maybe so for instance I can give you the high sexuality. Do you think let me give you the hypothetical? No, no, no, do you think you could change somebody's sexuality through conversion therapy? Let's you have to you have to let me explain. I know you don't want you're gonna dodge that question I'm not going to dodge anything. I'll answer it. Yes or no, right? I'll answer it. I think yes Yes, of course, okay. It's been done It's been done. Have you ever heard? Yes, you need to look you have you you have people that look at the convert it That's an Andrew respond if you look at the mk ultra experiments which have all been publicly released You will find that the cia and the nsa and many of the other intel agencies have done massive experiments on changing people's sexuality With significant success rates. Okay Look it up. You're see. Yeah, look at it. Listen. Oh, I'm not. I'm just looking at the chat Uh, no, I just think once again, this is the dangers of religion to where you start thinking that things unscientific things like conversion therapy Praying the gay away is going to change somebody's sexuality But hey man, you know, this is what religion does and made you believe illogical things How is it unscientific if they did experiments proving that it could be done? I don't and you could change the sexuality the other way to source. Yeah, I don't believe if you apply significant amounts of You've seen it yourself. Do you think that people inside of prisons who go into prison heterosexual and inside of prison act As homosexuals, you know, don't you think that their sexuality has been changed due to environmental pressures? No, I'm not going to speculate on that. I don't know. Yeah, that's right. That's what I thought No argument. I don't argue data that I don't have enough. Why do you think that would be? Why would they engage in homosexual behavior when they go in straight? There could be all kinds of reasons why give me one I don't have to give you. Yeah, you don't have anything. Never have anything dude. No, no Yeah, I don't ever have anything nothing personal attacks and mockery and making fun of people the way you deserve to be mocked You have no arguments. I mean, that's just your opinion but if you think that the way to debate and and engage with other people is just a Do like well, even if I don't have any good arguments, man, you don't have to be an asshole I don't have to be I know but you choose to be I do to people Right. I mean, but did Jesus tell you to do that? Uh, did Jesus tell me to be an asshole to you specifically? He did not No, that's a choice. I'm making but I'll ask for forgiveness later. I know. I mean, that's the easy thing for you Because there's no real accountability with religion. This is why people believe in it You're not actually accountable for anything because Jesus does on the cross for your sin Well, I mean as much as you want to talk smack you haven't made a single argument the entire night Anytime I make one to you Let's nothing. I just made a argument about ridiculous religion is believing that a god could take away your sins By being born of a virgin and dying on a cross. Yeah, I don't think I don't think that god who has instructed his flock to Go out and refute all arguments All arguments. He didn't say you have to be nice about it. In fact, you need to refute arguments You can not be an asshole to people. No, no the thing is just be kind. He said be like be as gentle Yeah, well lambs. I'll tell you what when you're gentle when you follow the advice, I'll follow the advice Oh, I do follow you. There's a second. I've been treating you with the tone that you've treated me You started off by attacking my hat, which is ironically I've only had one other person attack my hat And I it's just funny to me. Uh, they said I was Dude, that was just funny man. That was just funny. I don't really it wasn't even a personal attack I called your hat stupid stupid. I I know but it kind of it shows the kind of you're such a fucking whine ass Stop whining. Let's move to the second part whining for the sake of our live chat. Let's smoke more cigarettes Let's move to the second part of our question there. So any bengie you got, uh You got us all riled up over here with that first part of your super chat And we're not even done with this question is we have a part too. How are men equal to women? That's for you Skylar. Yeah, the question is is whether, uh Men and women should have the right to vote and equal in that way Right and what religion is trying to do is take away the right Is a woman as a human being to have the right to vote the same thing it did with color people's color Are uh, what other religions did to each other by trying to take away other people's religion? When religion had infighting so the argument about equality is about the idea that as a human being they should be able to Vote as a human being they should be able to work like men. They should be able to have jobs They shouldn't have to follow or obey what men tell them to do um Now he like I said my opponent can say it's not immoral for men to do this to women or It's not objectively immoral for men to stop women from voting, but that just once again shows you how Uh, what kind of morality comes from religion? Especially andrew's hateful really Over to you there Andrew do you have any thoughts there? Yeah, so I mean this is kind of simple, right? Uh secularists are any criticism that you would levy and say religious people want to take away The right to do x you could levy the same exact charge at secularists So I don't even know what this guy why does he keep bringing this up? It's insane Not only that religious people aren't trying to take away rights, right? They're actually doing the opposite They're just looking at what logically works within a patriarchal system because the patriarchal system is necessary You can't get away from it. There's nothing that can be done about that. It's a descriptor for reality So since that's true, we have to work within the descriptor of reality. We don't have a choice The the concept of secular secularism doesn't teach people to own slaves or teach people to treat women as property Right under secularism. They could have those views that women should be property But secularism in and of itself doesn't teach those things like religion does where the christians teaching this to people Yeah, it's it's called Leviticus 25. Yeah, but but christian nations hold no slaves I'm sorry christian nations hold no slaves and say hold no slaves clearly the followers of yelling Clearly their religion god, sir. Clearly their religion is not teaching them to own slaves. That's ridiculous No, no, they go against their religion now and don't own slaves. So then so then they're not being taught to own slaves We're talking about all of human history, man. We're not just talking about no You just literally we're talking about rights in the modern sense No, you're now you're going back to rights, which isn't what we were just talking about Yes, so it yes, it is what we were just talking about. Well, then what were we just talking about? You tell me, right? What was it? Well, let's let's keep it on topic. Let's keep it on topic with earnest super chat here. Ernest Harris five dollars Schuyler, how do you know what's harmful and what's beneficial? Well, you can ask people what's harmful to them, right? Like if if someone says hey, don't beat me and hurt me like in the bible It says you can beat new slaves With a rod and as long as you don't kill them You're not to be punished because they're your property, right? Well, you can ask the slave if they want to be beat with a rod and they want to be harmed Right, so that's an easy way. You can ask what harm is or decide what harm is But it's always weird in this world how all of a sudden people don't have a concept of harm in these debates All of a sudden they don't realize they argue strange things are not harmful or harmful. So That's my answer All right, and over to you andrew. Yeah, it's funny because you can also ask people About self-destructive behavior and have them say that it harms them to not be able to engage in that self-destructive behavior For instance smoking would be a great example of this or eating too many cheeseburgers or any number of different things Just asking people what they consider to be harmful to them is not a really good metric for determining What's actually harmful to them? That's that's fucking insane again Just an insane metric after insane metric you can ask them sure but that doesn't mean you're gonna know they have physical pain I'm sorry. Do they not know they have physical pain. What does that do with what I just said harm Yeah, but that's not what your metric is your arm hurt Yeah, but that wasn't your metric arm. No, you said your metric Beating somebody with a rod was my metric That was my example. You know You said you can ask a slave Skyler, let's let in let's let in no no no bees. He's misprint. I'm gonna I'll give the proper thing of what I said Right. He's just trying to reword what I said. What I said was Under christianity What it teaches you you can beat your slave with a rod and someone asked and I said that's Harmful to someone asked. Hey, how is that harmful? Well, you can ask the slave if it hurts them through pain and he's pretending like somehow like you can't ask somebody To tell them what's harmful. They're like you can totally articulate what's harmful to somebody. That's just ridiculous You can also totally articulate things which aren't harmful to you whatsoever and consider them to be harmful and vice versa That's the whole problem with having the just a subjective metric. You have to have something that's concise That's one and two when you're talking about An issue like slavery for instance, you keep on saying christianity teaches you to own slaves Where's all the slave owning christians show them to me? Where are they look at the majority of history? I asked now. Where are they? Are there any right now? Does that mean that the majority of christians didn't own slaves? It means that right your argument that now things are better Therefore the most of the majority you claim now. They're being top. Hold on This is this is a great overall point, right? What andrew's trying to argue is that right now it's good, right? But we're having a talk about whether religion is good for society overall And if we look right now history and we look throughout history Most of history is christians owning slaves, right? So most of religion throughout history has been slavery associated just because right now people had some type of morals that are Are opposed to the bible the bible doesn't tell you can't own slaves. It tells you can own slaves So let's not get a twist that there is so so first there's two problems Most of history is everybody owning slaves not just christians. That's absurd and then secondly He keeps on saying he asserts. He asserts again and again and again Hey, guess what uh christianity the reason it's bad It is because it teaches people that they can own slaves It's like where's all the christian slave owners in and he says well, they're not anywhere now So then I guess now christians are majority of you. It's the majority of the christian history It's the majority of christians. It's not it is not. No, okay, when did slavery stop? Inside of which demographic where let's say the united states Well inside of the united states slavery was officially abolished in the 1700s globally and then in late late I'm asking the united states. I I just said that. Okay. So in the before it was abolished You said how long was there? Stop. I'm trying to answer. I'm asking you. How long was there slavery united states? You have to stop talking No, you're getting away from my point and I think you know what's happening When you we need to pass it over Are you upset by me? You should I should I whatever you want? Hold on. So you're you're interrupting me right now skylers So I have to put you on mute. I'm sorry, buddy Um, yeah, if you don't feel like he's answering your question in a way that's convincing You can let him know that once he's done speaking. I'm sorry But you know, we do want to try to keep this rolling along So if you want to restate your question as skyler there And then we want to hand it over to andrew and let him answer the question. Okay Yeah, is it morally wrong to interrupt people? No No, okay But we will mitigate it on the show as much as we can. I'm sorry to say Uh, you know, there's there's been a lot of cross talk throughout the debate But we're trying to Limit how much I've been kind of involved here because I want to make sure that your guys are the voices that are getting heard majoritively here So let's continue on with the super chats Um Soon in them two dollars. Thanks for being back soon in them in the uh live chat Skyler don't agree with you, but girly men always win Early mid I like the derogatory word towards men is to call them girly Because if being a girl is a bad thing, I I think it's funny But it's just another negative example of what religion does The human beings it makes them think less of women Oh, no, it just makes us think less of feminine men But the reason that you you're calling them feminine men is because they're like women That's right. That's the problem because because because they're not supposed to be women They're not interchangeable widgets. Yeah, but they're not women. You're just calling them right. They're not women That's the whole point. But but do you how do you come up with this idea? There's a certain way women are to act be well There are certain biological markers which influence this which would include hormones and everything else Which is why we have the trend of how they act You don't think like male aggression would be a negative over Woman hormones. Yeah, that's why religion teaches temperance. We understand that men have trouble with aggression sorry Because I'm just thinking like you don't practice it at all, right? He was the exact form of aggression Which is uh, which has been useful for the debate nothing more Let's continue on with our super chats there So somebody has a question for you andrew michael the canadian atheist five dollars More canadians in the live chat tonight Andrew fails his christian obligation under first peter 315. What is first peter 315? Do you guys know? I'm looking it up now. I can get that one for you if you want all right, so first peter First peter 315 But in your hearts set apart christ's lord always be prepared to give an answer to everyone Who asks you to give reason for the hope that you have but do this with gentleness and respect Okay, so they're saying that you failed your christian. Well, that's nice. We don't have we don't have contextualization for this exact passage So so you disagree with that? I said we didn't don't have contextualization. No, no, I'm asking do you agree I disagree that we have contextualization. Yeah, okay. That's a dodge Well, I I would have to have the contextualization I mean, I mean if it's that hard to understand what's right and wrong within your religion where you have to go back to a book Written by people thousands of years ago to know what's right or wrong. I should tell you more about why Yeah, well, I guess is that a criticism you would levy towards mathematics Mathematics is a religion. Yeah, but is it a criticism you would levy It's based on levy towards mathematics that you have to go back to this thousand year old Principles in order to currently understand math is that it would you levy the same criticism? No, it seems absurd. No math is based on facts and reality religion is made on imagination and make believe Really? So you're saying that theology is not a legitimate branch of philosophy just like mathematics No, I said religions are bullshit and their imagination Beliefs your christian islam Whatever religion you want to put in well show me show me math. Where does it exist? What does this have to do with well, you just said it's a I know you love to just keep changing the topic to something that's not related to christian We're on the topic now. It has nothing to do with math. We're on the topic. Where's math math? Show me where math is a category or it's not the same thing Let's continue on uh, since this is to say application of logic applied regardless We're not to be the same category. Definitely. We're not having a logic debate on the epistemology or where logic comes from or anything We're having a debate on whether religions better for society Yeah, I get it But if you bring up a criticism then i'm going to count the criticism of it Your criticism was that I had to appeal to a thousand year old book my criticism to you is you have to do the same thing No, it was no, you see that's the problem. You thought it was about the age and it's about the imagination That was your criticism. So I responded to the criticism. Yeah, but the imagination of those people was the point Well, I mean now later you give a qualifier, right? No, no, that's what I said I know it's not what you said. I said the original the imagination of bronze age or I'm sorry ancient samaritan people That was way earlier, dude. That's so you just forgot what I said earlier. Yeah 15 minutes ago. It doesn't have any application of what you're saying now It seems like you have like you talk about manliness, but you have no sense of like owning anything as a man You just make excuses in your bitch about why other people are wrong or why you're still whining, dude That's what I'm saying like this question was Stop whining stop whining Well, this is actually more of an accusation from uh, from michael here Accusing you of failing your christian obligation. So you heard it here michael, uh, you heard it here first We're going to continue on with our super chats there um Sooner than five dollars this one's for you andrew aren't christians supposed to hate vaccines medicine etc Because the holy spirit saves you are these types of christians wrong or ignorant? Are you secular? This is something which moves into protestantism And no medicine has not been traditionally rejected by the orthodox church However, I would have a skeptical scrutiny towards Towards various medicines which come out due to the replication crisis which affects the medical community Almost more than anything aside from sociology. In fact, it it may have overtaken sociology at this point So I would have some degree of skepticism as a rational person But uh to say that christianity and medicine Are somehow contrary to each other because you have a you know, a few minute cases of people Um to reject medicine based on their religions absurd Yeah, I mean, this is just an outcome of religion once again when you believe in things that aren't true You're able to fill in gaps with whatever your imagination can create whether it being anti science vaccine anti human rights Um, you know, it's funny too like when we talk about religion and we talk about like something like slavery I mean, there's more slavery today. That's still supported in islam than it was You know, actually because andrew was trying to make it the point. There's less slavery today Uh, but actually religion uh was more slavery than there ever was on earth today And that's deeply rooted into the abrahamic religions and what god told you you could own so That's all I have to say about that All right closing thoughts on that one andrew where it was for you Yeah, it's a more incoherent babbling So what was stated and you can rewind the tape again see is the claim of christians owning Slaves that was the claim not whether or not other religions in modernity and this would have been a good point I was actually ready for him to bring this up that muslims do have Uh an overage of slaves so that we could get into that topic But we never actually got into it basically anything about religion and society because Isn't this the wine you know this is me giving this is why explaining This is whining, right? No, this is you whining now. No, no, no, I'm just pointing out you're still whining You are still whining. We're gonna let andrew close the question there. Um, We can continue on if you think he's not enough time to answer the question Well, we can continue on uh if you're if you want to wrap up See that was that was whining right there Right. That's that's what whining looks like a question. Now you're a whining to the moderator again Is there something morally wrong with you notice? I haven't whined to the moderator is there is there something Is there something wrong with whining? So let's let andrew close this question now. Yeah, I don't think Why do you keep complaining about wine? Is there something morally wrong? Do you do is there anything wrong with saying that there's a problem with whining? Are you asking a question with a question? Are you just did that to me? And now you're saying it's not okay. I can't take ownership. You never you dodge All right, man. Let's go to the next question Well, like I said, this is this is for andrew. So andrew All right, andrew andrew fucking say your last thing Well, you can interrupt these chylers sorry to say so We're having a back and forth. So it's okay. What was the question andrew's even asking at this point? Answering at this point It is okay. I'm just saying that if you want us to get through it just uh, just sit tight for two seconds All right, I'm gonna go outside of my theater It's about andrew aren't christians supposed to hate vaccines medicine, etc. Because the holy spirit saves you Yeah, we just did that question. Yeah, so you're done with that one. So we can continue on John rap two dollars. Thank you so much for your super chat religion proven harmful exhibit one Andrew so that's just kind of like an ad hum. We're going to continue on from there pseudonym five dollars Schuyler you admitted as an atheist. You're not secular. What kind of atheist is not secular Can you be secular against atheist? If so, what position is that for you? Yeah, I'm not an atheist. So Yeah, just that's just a misunderstanding in my position, but yeah, totally not an atheist Okay, uh, let's continue on then the flying gospel five dollars canadian Schuyler know that science universities and hospitals all emerge from catholic monasteries science emerged from christian veneration of creation Yeah, look at I said there's there's good things religion is done. I'm not saying that religion's never done a good thing I'm talking about if you were to compare the overall effects of religion on society that there's a A net a net negative for society is what my argument is And you thought it's over there andrew. Yeah, he never demonstrated that once He just kind of like rambled about how at some points in history Some people were treated poorly by other people. That was it That was the entirety of schuyler fiction's argument nothing more Still never responded to any of my points because you can't respond to him, right? He has nothing the guy has nothing has no arguments for this at all All right, it's sad. Let's kick it back to schuyler to close the side on that question No, I just awkward laughter always says it all Okay, let's continue on made by jim bob born 99. Thanks for your super chat, buddy Schuyler if empathy is an involuntary Signal and morality is based on choice. How can you determine what we ought do based on empathy? I don't Any expounding on that or is that uh, where you'd like to leave it? Leave it Yeah, we can continue. That's perfect Alrighty triple j 499 laughs at himself. Yeah 499 schuyler is an intellectual coward Refuses to provide any justification for his worldview that he regards superior to all the world's religions ever Oh, I would have been happy well I would have been happy to have a debate worldview versus worldview, you know Uh, but I was given these three choices of debate and this is what I chose I wanted to have a debate on actual Andrews views and christianity, but he refused to do so He didn't want to defend his his christian position And we ended up with a debate uh on religion and whether religion's good for society. So That's why we're here All right, I need lots on the other side. Do you want to continue? I'll be right back. You can keep going All right. Well, we'll find a question for you there. Andrews and schuyler is taking uh bathroom break. Um, So stake your yes two dollars and drew so it's okay to harm people Iaw the bible When does aiw stand for you want to help me out live chat? I'm like on the cuspus of 30. I don't understand these words I gotta look this up You guys are you guys are being too slow with the the catching up because we're a little bit ahead in accordance with thank you Google Andrew so it's okay to harm people in accordance with the bible Thank you google there may be certain circumstances with which you need to harm people for their own good This can be demonstrated in any number of different ways Take a look at prisons for instance blocking people up. I'm sure that they would think that harms them Um, but on the other hand you may have to reform certain behaviors and it's necessary So again, when you're talking about harm the subjective term You have to be really concise by what you mean by it and i'm willing to engage with it But you have to tell me kind of specifically what you're after Um, and then I can engage with that directly All right, let's continue on Made by jimbab 499 Schuyler if empathy did we already read this one? Hold on a second. I think we already read this one Schuyler if empathy is an involuntary signal. Yeah. Yeah, we did. Yeah. All right. I'm just just double checking here Because I had to jump around a bit where you popped out All right, perfect Coffee mom dollar 99. How do you demonstrate the moral foundation of god? That's probably for you andrew Or let's go for both of you imagine. Yeah, so So if you're asking me directly, I would use transcendental categories um, but when when we're talking about this for Morality, especially you would have to first demonstrate That god's likely and then from there you would eliminate all other religions By kind of putting them to the logic test So you'd have to have consistency as well and then I mean there's There's kind of a giant process to it. It's not a not a fast At all, but you would start with demonstration and then from demonstration you would remove everything else Uh based on logical outcomes and then you kind of come up with the only things which are possible So that's that's how you would go about trying to demonstrate that What angers articulating is something that's not even possible Uh, you could have a hypothetical logically consistent god, but it doesn't mean exist Right, so there's no way to actually disprove every So I just I think it's I think andrew understands his foul What he messed up on now by his look on his face. So I'll just leave it at that It's just so it's so stupid and low tier dude. You can That makes a case just calling it low tier and stupid. You can't brilliant argument Demonstrate you keep why couldn't you demonstrate that there was a god toxic you just talk shit You know, I couldn't you demonstrate that there's a god that makes no sense to me to argue a negative you said it was impossible Yes, because you said so tell me why it's impossible to be able to demonstrate a god Listen, I'm listening. I want to answer that your way of the way you described You'd be able to demonstrate all other gods didn't exist by using logic as an argument Yeah, so you can have a logical god that's not inconsistent that doesn't actually exist by definition Yeah, but that wouldn't make it impossible Right, it wouldn't make it impossible for that. Why did you say it was impossible? For you to show that it's your god. That's the point. God, you're dumb. It's not I can't even do it anymore You're really not just can't okay. I actually I'd like to respond then if he doesn't want to respond to it I'll do it. Yeah. So when he talks about once again He was the one who gave the criteria criteria how he could eliminate other god concepts So that he could show that his is the only true god and that Therefore moralities can the morality that objectively exists is connected to it, right? Now the way he said it once again He was going to get rid of every other god concept was by showing logical inconsistencies First you don't have access to all types of god ideas or concepts, right? And just because someone could come up with a concept of a god that's logically consistent doesn't make it mean that it wouldn't That it means it exists. So you would know so if something's logical consistent could possibly exist You couldn't disprove it. So then it's possible If you don't oh my lord, you really don't get it, do you so that it's possible just say yes, andrew it's possible No, that's not what the point was. Yeah, but you said it was impossible So is it possible or impossible you're trying no what was impossible is you being able to eliminate other gods Not that there was a god that exists Okay, so it is possible then to demonstrate god. Thank you. No, no, no, no, what you would be impossible for you to That was the question which was asked. No, it wasn't. Yes. It was how you distinguish your god No, it was the question was how you distinguish your god, andrew from other Gods and that morality is connected to it And you said that you'd be able to use logical arguments to show all other gods don't exist Right. This is how you would to make the attempt to demonstrate That was my point. You don't have no it doesn't matter. It's not impossible. That's how you would do it the corner It just doesn't matter or it's it's irrelevant. It isn't relevant I'll let the audience decide once again your bad philosophy. All right. Well, yeah, bad philosophy Let's try to continue on there. We're laughter We're we're gonna try to continue. I think I think you you think that when I'm laughing at you I'm doing it awkwardly. This is just how I laugh at people. Oh, no, it's awkward. Yeah, no, it's totally awkward So, yeah, let's not make it awkward right now. I'm trying to read brian stevens question here. Oh, you've done it Oh, it's all messed up my train of thought. No, it's fine. It's fine. Skyler. You're okay Everybody's doing fine. We're having a we're having a good time over here. Andrew who made things really awkward We are debating tonight is society better off with religion And brian stevens who's been a member for 23 months has put in his question And we're gonna read it can andrew give the name and a direct quote for apa Now I look that up and I think it's american Yeah, the american psychological association. I'd have to look up the um, I don't remember the apa president's name Uh, but he was referencing the 1970s At the time when he was president, I believe and he went through kind of the litany It's uh, the video is roughly 15 minutes or so where he he talks about conversion therapy and how it was highly successful At least in the beginning trials, but that these different organizations came in And began to take over the uh internalized or the the internal functions of the apa So I'd have to look up the guy's name. I don't remember it off the top of my head Are you saying it was successful in the 70s? When was the time period this program was successful? I believe he referenced it as the 70s was when It was when they started. Yeah Do you know what they did to to get the gay out basically like what what what kind of techniques they use for the conversion therapy? Yeah, well it varied sometimes they use secular methods and sometimes they use religious methodology But he said that there was great success and at least it was very promising at first But what's this like what do you say they use religion? What do they use? Like what how do they do it? They would probably use different forms of counseling various forms of behavior control Various affirmations things like that. How is that like but from religion? What how would he use religion to have behavior control because religion utilizes affirmations? So affirmations can be very helpful to people I mean, you know, that's not just religion if i'm gonna use your argument where that's correct It's not which is why I just said that's that wouldn't be a benefit So I literally just said that they use secular and religious methods which part of that didn't you hear Listen the better you don't know you misunderstood me. We can go to the next question It's tiring when you misunderstand me. Let's try to misunderstand you awkward laughter We did find the other super chat by made by Jim Bob That's why I got confused there earlier and I want to say for 4.99 Thanks, Jim Bob for keeping this next question light We appreciate it Schuyler, is it morally okay to have sex with a corpse if it doesn't harm anyone if no then harm isn't your basis Keeping a light I don't know. I think you might have broke broke our speaker Is it more awkward is that awkward laughter or is that real? No, I think it's a funny question. Uh, I mean it would be harmful to the the family of the dead person, right? What if the dead person had no family? That's impossible No, it's not impossible for a dead person to not have any connection to their family whatsoever Oh, you mean like their family's not alive anymore? Yeah, or or they just have no Whatever reason they were orphans or some kind of corpse or we having sex with here. Well, who cares? It's irrelevant to the question Uh, no, I my my moral system actually isn't completely based on harm. I was just giving examples of when we were talking about society Uh in society harm, uh is damaging Uh, so it's not necessarily a moral, uh position. It's when I that isn't necessarily the standard of my morality's harm So what if I do find it? I would say it would be a moral under my system to have sex with a dead person Why if it's gross and it would be like it'd be like hurrying. Okay, great Hey, that's perfect diseases. I could get diseases then under my system. No, I would fall under Actually, that would fall into harm actually because I could harm myself by getting diseases or Perfect. Yeah, that would fall into those are all the those are all critiques under your system. You should apply to homosexuality No, uh being attracted to somebody doesn't harm you Yeah, but don't you think that the rampant rates of hiv and stds would harm you? Yeah, but that's not homosexuality. That's the type of sex you have Yeah, a homosexual sex specifically is what transfers hiv at the highest degree Well anal sex does but not all homosexuals have anal sex. It doesn't matter if all of it does because anal sex Yeah, but not all sucks with the dead body You know straight people have anal sex too, but it would be just as high the rates of chance of getting They're not They're not as high. They're not no, they're objectively not as high not only that you got to help me out here Why would it be more likely a male you wouldn't get Necessarily from a dead body, right? But a male wouldn't get AIDS from a woman from anal sex What would be the bylaw? That's not what I said. I said that rates. I said the rates objectively for homosexuals are extraordinarily high I'm saying that the rate if you have That type of sex it would be any time you do that type of Uh sex that would have then why are the rates so much higher for homosexuals? Well because homosexuals typically use do more of that type of sex, but it doesn't mean but it but it doesn't follow your logic My logic's fine. No, it's not but you say no, no, you're not you're saying that okay Let me is it the sex that's immoral or the attraction. It's what I'm talking about. You know that is we are talking about You are you are What we are talking about the right or wrongness of this right now I you're saying I'm asking you is it the attraction to a human being Because you're referencing the physical action. That's harmful. Yeah, but it isn't a physical being gay You're also referencing reference. No, I reference being gay No for the dead body you referenced that no harm came from having from the disease that you might contract So I said, well, why won't you apply that same logic to homosexuality considering the disease rate is so high Because you can be homosexual without having uh anal sex. Yes, but you can have sex with a dead body without contracting a disease I don't know go ahead and say no go ahead and say no Go ahead and say no point. I don't think you you're realizing that's not the point How is it not the point is exactly did you you know every time you say something like how is that not the point? That's an argument from ignorance You said because you but do you understand that right every time you say how is it not the case this? That's arguing a negative. It's a you're saying. Hey, I'm claiming this There's just a verdict. You're just diverting dude. It's just not answer the question Do you think that do you think every single time you have sex with a dead body? Then you get a disease That's what you do. No, I don't think well, then how does it not follow that the only reason it's immoral That it's the only reason that it's immoral for you to have sex with a dead body is because it's harm against yourself If I can demonstrate that you would have the same exact Oh, it's not the only reason. I don't face morality just on harm I I have a kind of well, then why is it wrong to have sex with a dead body like jim blub ask Are you saying objectively? He asked you the question. Well, what does he mean objectively reread the question moderator? Oh boy. Well, I would like to move on from this lovely light topic, but that's okay. You guys are focused Uh, thanks jim bob for this sky skyler. Is it morally okay to have sex with a corpse if it doesn't harm anyone? If no, then harm isn't your basis If it doesn't harm anyone, uh, is it immoral? Yeah, yeah, yeah, it would be psychologically harmful to me What about a person? It's not I can never I don't see how there could ever be a case where it would not be harmful to have sex with a corpse Like what would be a case of that? What if what if a person really really wants to do it? It's still not why would one have to whether it's healthy or good for you Well, I mean how else how else would you ascertain it was psychologically harmful other than how they reported it made the Well, I mean Listen, you know, there are people who desire to do all types of things through their body Just because you desire do something doesn't mean that that's Correct. I think yeah, that was my point earlier that you disagreed with But but still but still now on this point. I got to ask you You say you can't envision a case of it not being psychologically harmful How could you ascertain that it was psychologically harmful if this person's reporting that their mental health increases by doing it How would we know that that is true? Or are you talking about we have like a medical device that would How how you How in the world could you possibly know without them reporting it to you? Oh, that's a weird idea All right. Well, let's you know, I have an answer. Let's move away from the Yeah, I think it's a very strange question I say it's a moral that sex with dead people, but you could think it's moral that sex dead people All right. Well, yes, let's uh, you know, I was going to say moving on from the uh, the welcome to my nightmare album For the Alice Cooper fans in the audience there Uh Stay curious for five dollars Um, the military used to have don't ask don't tell was that a good thing andrew Yeah, it was well, I would I would take it a step further And I would exclude homosexuals from the military altogether like they used to do And there's a good reason behind this which is that the military life is confined in space So I mean you're sharing everything from spoons out in the field to to saw I mean everything It's a very confined especially in battlefield situations now. I have any experience myself with those situations But I do have some experience with the military though not much um Yes, it's a very it's very confined people are very close in And generally speaking Unity and uniformity is the highest value of the military nothing's higher than that The whole point is to break you down into something which is cohesive. So they try to do that You know to the to the best degree that they possibly can so yeah, I would I would exclude them Completely and women from the military as well I think it's funny how religion causes uh religious people to be Afraid of gay people in close corners Right like as if like the gay people are going to try to take a look at their junk or have some sexual thoughts Or try to molest them or something. It's like I don't want to be too close to those gays because I don't like them And I feel uncomfortable around them. Uh, yeah, I mean listen. This is just This is a great example once again of religion causing you to believe things that aren't even rational Right, it's not rational to think that because Our humans being gay that you should feel uncomfortable around them or you shouldn't feel safer at them There are gay men who are marines fucking snipers badass people uh that They're their attraction to the same sex doesn't affect their job Andrew's making and claiming that they're uh same sex attraction affects their job But that's just an empty claim on andrew because we can see how well Gay folks do in the military Yeah, so so that's not my claim. I'm I didn't even make a religious claim. I'm talking about cohesion You understand that right? We're just talking about cohesion whether it's a rational Let me finish whether it's rational or it's whether whether it's rational or it's irrational Whatever the belief is doesn't matter What matters is how it operates in real time in the military even if all the beliefs that a homosexual are totally Irrational inside of the the squad unit a company whatever If it brings down or disorders it in any way shape or form that would be bad for the military unit. You realize that right? The reason that it becomes bad for the military unit is because The folks aren't becoming cohesive with the gay people. They're calling them out saying you can't be in here Like you're literally creating a problem. You're saying hey These gay people are the problem the straight people can't work with them So we need to get the gay people out of the military. That's what your argument is So it's quite sad. Like, I mean this shows you what your religion once again does You you you're the one who makes these differences gay straight woman male, right? And then you try to put that on us and say oh, well, no, no, no Uh, yeah, go ahead. No, man. You you say you're you're a bigot of shit. You need to say There's there's nothing bigoted that I said it's just a descriptor for reality Regardless of what brings down unit cohesion Regardless of why the unit cohesion is brought down You want whatever that element is to be removed whether or not the fear of whatever it is or whatever the process is is rational It doesn't matter You understand that No, no, it does matter because religion is the reason why it's not cohesive Because if you're whacked out views on gay people and women, that's why it's not cohesive You're you're blaming cohesiveness But the reason it's not cohesive is because of the religious views Yeah, but the why wouldn't matter Well, it would it would be like hey, we're not going to let blacks in the military because it causes People not to be cohesive with the white supremacists Okay, so that's what you're arguing to do. If you know, I'm not arguing that at all If I if I'm not giving an ought I'm giving a descriptor for what is if I'm giving a descriptor for what is I got so what's the odd so if we talk about a different Time period and we use a description of how in the military when blacks started coming into the military That people argued that the units wouldn't be cohesive because they weren't and they segregated right But they weren't and they segregated exactly and that's the same thing. You're telling them to do to gay No, I'm giving you a descriptor for reality that in the military the highest value We should do this to gaze. I didn't give an odd. I didn't give the odd Oh, gee, I know only time Acknowledge the only time I said hang on let me finish I the only time I said this I did say that I would exclude Homosexuals from the military altogether. That was my only odd based on cohesiveness Not just based on cohesiveness But you're going to see an overall unit fighting force decrease. It's going to be a massive decrease I mean if we fall at your logic, we would never have blacks in the military. That's not true That's not true. It took we fall at your logic, which is the separate. No, it took 200 years roughly Before you started to see this kind of cohesion exist between blacks and whites in the military too before that they had They had segregated units. Yes, it is true. That's not fair. It hasn't been 200 years now. It was about 200 years. No, it wasn't Well, let's go. Okay. How long was it? How long was it 200 years? How long was it because we even we haven't had a military force was blacks in our military force for 200 years Yes, we have It didn't start till the 1900s What what didn't we had we had black soldiers in the revolutionary war you dunce And the confederate sucks, but we're not that's the revolutionary war didn't have a confederacy So are you saying there wasn't uh, the revolutionary war had no confederacy. There was no cohesion No, no, no back up. You just got done saying that the revolutionary war had a confederate side that allowed blacks in it No, what we what you're referencing is you're running from the modern time with what year did blacks start Awkward laughter not I just can't even believe that you said that man. I yeah well yeah back in the revolutionary war they fought on the side of the confederates This is big brain stuff, bro Yeah, I don't know what I said, but you know It is what you said question was for Andrew. So Question was for Andrew. So if you want to close us up 10 seconds Two minutes off your life every time you how many of you spoke this hour these five Do you believe cigarette smoking is bad for you? I've met Christians who don't that's why I ask Yeah, I think that it has some negative health ramifications. You don't think it causes cancer I didn't say that No, I asked you does it cause cancer? I think that it can lead to cancer. Yeah Yeah, okay, let's try to get back to our subject and also let Andrew close out on the Subject here of don't ask don't tell was that a good thing Andrew? So if we can wrap it up in like 15 seconds your final thoughts on that Yeah, I think that it helped with unit cohesion. That's it ultimately I am anti-lgbtq that is true and I don't back away from that one iota But I also think that there's reasonable arguments for why that should be the case even if you're a secularist And that's it. Are you afraid of them? Are you like scared of them is what it is? I mean, I'm scared of what it leads to like transgenders having children mutilate themselves for instance Transgenderism and Homosexuality are actually two completely different topics. Yeah, that's why I think they may try to include it include it in like little q lgbtq But technically one's about sexuality and one's about gender and homosexuality is about Being attracted to the same gender gender. It's a little it's a little different actually So it's not actually harmful to be attracted to the same sex. Okay, whatever you might say particular types of sex are harmful But straight people can have those things. I mean you were you were just got done. You just got done, you know talking about Sex with dead bodies isn't immoral. That's not what I said. Yeah, it is. It was immoral. Yeah All right All right until until somebody discovers necromancy. Let's stay away from the The other word that starts with that. All right, let's keep going um Mella for five dollars. Skyler literally said if we do what he thinks christianity says we should do it will be better for society That's true. He did Don't about me like if we did what I said was better christianity. Are you talking about you? He's saying you That I said you should do a certain thing with I don't ask the question again Yeah, skyler literally said if we do what he thinks korea christianity says we should do it will be better for society What what in context was that I don't remember say that what's in the context I'm not sure. I don't think christianity would be better for society. Oh, I was joking around about jesus I was thought that was what I was really just showing the hypocrisy hypocrisy of anger And how he doesn't actually follow what jesus says I did say some stuff about if you listen to what jesus said that was one of the examples of something positive that comes from religion Um, but we can see that my my opponent doesn't have any of those attributes all righty Henry two eight one seven four ninety nine A less bad Protestant apologetics and more andrew on modern day debate, please All right, so you had a fan there andrew Uh, let's continue on always nice to see uh Some nice compliments to our speakers who are here on their own time And we are continuing with our q&a on whether uh, society is better off with religion So keep those questions coming in stay curious five dollars andrew what evidence is there that patriarchy is necessary Also, would you give up your right to vote if you transitioned to being a woman? Well, there is there is you can't transition to being a woman So the the question itself makes no sense. That's it's a it's a physical impossibility Okay, let us continue on then Uh Gage paragon two dollars. Thanks for your super chat. What about women harmed by taking their right to vote? I they're taking their right is all one word. So I think yeah, I guess it's just like If I mean I can't convince you of why taking away something It's like stealing something from somebody that they have if a woman had the right to vote On her local laws and elections or vote for people that was going to best represent her and then you just say because you're a woman Uh, you're you don't have the right to do this. You're taking away something from her You're giving her you're taking away her freedom her ability to Have representation that she wants Uh, like I said, I I can't make you value that right obviously religion is made people not value that women should have any rights Or or women shouldn't be slaves or property Uh, I can like I can tell you right now. There's not one example of consent In the bible when it comes to marriage Not one of a woman consenting to being married It's always bought and sold By her parents sometimes to get out of debt Uh, and things along that nature But that's all I have to say about that Any thoughts on our other side or just carry on he had well he had no answer. So just like there's no answer Okay, well, let's carry on earn as Harris $2 Schuyler. Does everyone know what's best for them? No No, but they're the people you're always going to appeal to those people for what's best them though, right? What's best for them? I'm always going to appeal to people that don't know. Yeah, that's what you said earlier in the debate You said you said you have to you have to appeal to people and ask them What is good for them or bad for them? That's what you said No, I said that was one way to identify harm Because if you were hurting someone physically they could tell you that you're hurting them. Well, that's another way Is there any other way besides that another way that you could identify harm? Yeah, right? Well, you could observe it Well executing some like how would you know it's harm? Well executing someone's harmful. It ends their life. How would you? Right, but how would you know how would you know that it's harm? How would you know that it's because I have a brain and I have knowledge? So so if that person who's being I don't know what the person who's being executed doesn't believe that they're being harmed and you believe that they are being harmed. Who do we believe? It's objectively true. They're being harm doesn't matter if they believe it or not and what makes it objectively true That you're causing them physical pain and you're executing. What if they don't experience any physical pain and they're at the end of their life And they want and they want and they want you. Yeah, this is called a mercy killing. This happens all over the world No, but they would still feel pain Yeah, I know so so then it's immoral to do a mercy killing Is it immoral to do a mercy killing? Yeah, let's ask it this way Would it be a mercy? Would it be immoral to kill them slowly? You're not answering my question, bro No, I wouldn't find a mercy killing immoral in my worldview Right, you wouldn't find mercy killing to be immoral so harm In and of itself and physical pain is not always Uh, something that you can objectively know that that is uh, something good or bad, right? Well, yeah, I wasn't arguing that it was a pain was objectively wrong You said that you would actively know it. Yes, you did. No, no, no Well, there's a difference between something being objectively wrong and objectively knowing something You so you would objectively know that mercy killing was wrong. Well, no, no, no, we weren't talking about mercy killing We're talking about executing somebody. Yeah, but it's not the same thing. No, it's not the principle is the same No, it's not once for their will and once against their will. Yeah, but I got them telling you What if the person wanted it and you said you would still know it's immoral you said you would still know it's immoral It's immoral because I can look and see that it's causing physical harm Yeah, but so what do you know that killing a mercy killing would cause physical harm? What's the what's the difference as I'm asking this is my ask to you I I just how do you know one? Right a mercy killing would be Someone saying hey, I want this and the other would be saying I don't want this This would be uh, you could at least call it mental anguish there. Yeah, so how do you know which one's correct? By what standard are you asking? Well because you said that you have another way to identify what's harmful outside of asking people Yeah, if you can't if you I mean, I'm sorry. Are you you're trying to argue you can't identify a harm by looking at it No, that's well, well, yeah Are you disagree with that? Are you saying that I can't identify a harm by looking at it? Yeah, I'm asking you what no, no, I'm asking you is that the position that you're putting I'm doing an internal critique Well, you're not I didn't take a position. Okay. I say you can look at somebody and tell they're being harmed including with mercy killing A mercy killing. I'd be able to tell if they're getting harmed at a mercy killing. Okay, but so if harm bad Harm immoral according to you that mercy killing should be immoral. Why isn't it? You're I think you're once again mercy You said can I recognize if someone was objectively being harmed in a mercy killing and I said yes Yeah, but you said harm like I could so I could watch yes Harming somebody is bad. So why mercy killing good? It's just like, okay It isn't only the it's just like saying like I getting a needle is bad if I have to get a vaccine Like pain isn't necessarily bad Right. So harm is Objective harm is subjective of course harm is so if it's subjective of course give me have any objective Then give me a metric other than what a person reports that can be relied on You if you don't think you can identify harm just by watching it I I know like I said, I guess we're just gonna have to fundamentally disagree with this You say we can't identify harm by seeing it. I say we can't it's just a fundamental disagreement. All right Well, let's continue on from there. Uh, so our last super chat from gauge paragon. He clarified That it is it harmful to take away women's political voice I think is what they guys are harmful to take away women's voice in politics I was gonna say I I'd lost it in the live chat it kind of it was at the very top That would be for android No All right Let's continue on from there If you view that as bad or dangerous for society Then you would agree with my argument and this is what religions got you didn't make an argument Yeah, no, the argument is is that religion is bullshit Because you believe in bullshit you believe in bullshit ideas that aren't real, right? You have ideas about how women should be treated or what women's rights should be and because your religion's bullshit And it's not real you have false ideas about how women should be treated So that's the damage it doesn't society this would be the same critique that would be applied to your system Same thing. I we haven't we're not I don't even have the system you think you're talking about It doesn't matter what system you have We just this hand wave And wave it out. I can hand wave stupid arguments. I don't I mean, let's state I can just I can just destroy them and move right on I can just destroy them and move on Hey, hey everybody awkward laughter smoke more cigarettes. Let's continue on but uh, Are you not entertained? Are you not having fun? We're having a good discussion here over a modern day debate on whether society is better off with religion I see there's 413 of you guys still watching Take a moment to hit that like button now You can all have arthritis in your in your wrists and I can hit a like button with my nose with my phone So come on. What's wrong with you? All right shape shifter two dollars Schuyler is hot with a flame emoji and a little like thirst emoji as well Um shape shifter says is it a moral to think that? That's our first No, I don't think so. No, it's only it's only religious bigotry and fear Of the unknown And I mean this this fear of gay people christianity has comes from the bible, right? They grew up reading this book. They think this god is completely the most moral standard Even though he has babies executed and commits genocide It tells people you know slaves, but they get this idea that slavery is immoral, right from the bible And then they just take this principle and they just want to apply it within our legal system Right, this is once again one of the dangers of religion, which is the point of this debate. It's really funny I'm sure I'm sure he misspoke but he actually just said his words were they get the idea that slavery is Immoral from the bible and that's why they apply it that this standard that way. That's what he said Oh, yeah, and I would have misspoke. They would they would have got the idea that slavery was moral from the bible. You're good catch Alrighty, well, let's continue on we're getting you see that's the thing It's like unlike you. I understand like I appreciate humility and I appreciate the idea of being wrong about something and changing That's good because you should like you see but you just laugh and you just mock right You have no I deliver arguments and then laugh and mock after I deliver No, what you do is you you do nothing that jesus you have been destroyed You don't have a single argument It's terrible the kind of person jesus warned about That people like you would come around and lead people astray from the room. Yeah, what when did he say that? What's what was the scripture? You could actually you could read that. Yeah. What was the scripture? Yeah, it's it's actually math Yeah, what's the scripture? Matthew chapter two What's the scripture? I don't know it off the head right chapter two right? So the thing is you want me to google it Do you want me to find it so so all you believe it's not in there? All you're going to do is are you denying your christian? No, I'm denying. I'm denying that you Because you isolate a text because you isolate a text Doesn't mean anything have you read the whole bible. Yeah front to back multiple times Then how do you not understand it or I understand it fine? I understand there has to be contextualization for things though that just reading a scripture in the bible actually warned you about this It actually warned you about this. Just what do you say? How did he say we did no good just just reading scripture by itself? Without without having any contextualization without having any authority Generally speaking doesn't do you much good the bible is a huge self referencing book It's not something which is too easy for a layman to understand people study it for 30 40 years And still get confused by various things which are inside of it So I don't know what you just cherry picking your you know, it's not Doesn't mean anything Like I mean you denying that jesus as the canadian atheist actually super chatted Told you to be kind and gentle and you aren't that way like you'll make excuses for why because because you didn't Because you think i'm an asshole. Yeah, yeah, it's yeah, it's contextually not true that jesus wanted you to be gentle and kind It depends on the context of what he was talking about so morals aren't objective then if it's So if you two were to take if you were to take um a piece of a passage that just said kill them all Let's just say it hypothetically Stop and let me finish first samuel stop and let me finish stop and let me finish But hypothetically just said that okay kill them all and then afterwards it said is never A phrase that you should use and you only used kill them all to demonstrate your point Would you say that that's disingenuous? No, but what happens in the bible is it's answer my question. Yeah, I just said no, I just said no, but it's very no It's not disingenuous No, it's not and well, here's the thing in the in the bible you can look surprised shocked all over the place I am shocked. Yeah, let me go So in the bible what you're arguing where it talks about like specific violence, right? You have your god ordering in context human beings to go slice open babies for what not their parents did Generations of parents ago had done As revenge for what? Uh, you know, they're older generations have done. This is targeting babies Causing unneeded harm, right? This is a god who could just take the souls out of babies make them die in their sleep And then he forces his people as israelites Hebrews to go in with swords and slice them open go through that awful type of ptsd Um, but when you talk about like moral foundations, right? I can't understand from from that perspective I you could argue any like any type of pro-life position from the body We weren't talking about moral foundations. Yeah, sure when you say something's right or wrong. It's according to your moral I didn't make I didn't make a claim about right or wrong. Yeah, you've forgotten already where we were Okay, we can get our next question. That's because you're just being an incoherent babbling fool. No, no Do you disagree? Well, do you disagree the bible says that those stories? You know, I say I think that the bible is both literally true And I think it's allegorically true both of those things or do you think that particular story? Story is historical narrative that it is true that god ordered human beings to I think that everything in the bible is true Sure. Well, it's more so we hold up. It's so it's moral for under the christian religion I didn't make any odd claims about morality or anything else. It's called a question and you're avoiding the question Is it moral? Well, if you want to set up if you want to set up a debate on that way You wouldn't do it. No, I tried to and you refuse to debate your christian religion You know what? I promise I promise you that I'll come back Anywhere you want and have that debate with you too. So we'll so let's have a we'll have a pantheism versus christian debate. Sure Sure, we'll have a little power. All right. Let's go and work out some details fellows. I'm not opposed to that You know, we're having fun. Um, let's keep it going with our super chats though. All right bubblegum gun back again Uh, two dollars. Schuyler. Are you using circular logic for is again? So the word is is and what what's that in what context? It's kind of ambiguous Yeah, I'm not sure. I mean, I know you're not nice. You're right. He's saying this is true because it's true Well, what what did I say? This is true. You say that taking away women's rights is bad because it's bad No, no, no, no, I'm granting that it's objectively immoral. We don't want to care what you're granting. We're asking you Is it bad based on x? No, I'm granting objective morals, right? So unless you're unless you're saying something else is it Well, actually you did argue the opposite. You say it isn't immoral So we just have it somehow we have different views on objective morality, right? So he's asking you he's saying can you give an argument other than it's bad Because it's bad in your worldview not granting a worldview, but in your worldview. No, no, no Uh My any kind of argument for my moral system would be a different type of standard It wouldn't be an objective. So you couldn't then you say you are using is this is bad because it is no I was granting objective moral. Yeah, but you forget the granting it. I know So if you're just asking me why a particular thing x, what would you like to ask why what's what specific is a moral? He said he's asking like what the woman's argument Can you give an argument in your worldview for why it's bad other than because it is No, I said harm originally. Yeah under my worldview So harm and harm in various other types of things Empathy I I believe that it's moral to treat others as you'd want to treat yourself and that would be treating others As I don't want myself to be treated Okay, ma'am Yeah, all righty awkward laughter. Let's continue on that cancer Uh, so psych the worst cognitive dissonance. I've ever seen in my life to be honest with you skylar And this sounds like whiny No, no, no, it's just a descriptive claim of truth. Oh, okay. So You're just I don't know you guys are so spicy. Just a fuckface. Let's just no stop Stop all right. All right. We're I could tell you to eat a bag of dicks. Hold on now We're doing our best to behave ourselves. We're getting laid as I say we're late into the debate and uh, I don't think we're gonna get in any trouble for anything that gets said but still behave yourselves. All right, uh, Willem bones 499 skylar first time hearing you debate. You are crushing You said you are not an atheist. What is the god you believe him? I'm the deist deist pantheist Deistic pantheist and be a word somewhere in somewhere in that area Alrighty enslaved by truth five dollars skylar would starvation be preferable to slavery Could slavery ever be moral? No, this is like kind of uh It's basic coercion in a sense. It would be like, you know, saying, hey, you know, be my sex slave and I'll feed you Right, you're you're forcing someone to have to do something to survive because that's their only option Right. So if you're saying, hey, uh, you know Be my slave or you'll die. It's the same thing as saying have sex with me and be my sex slave or die I wouldn't find that moral under my particular system But in Christianity, it's moral but you can buy and sell women and keep captured women as your wife All right, uh, any thoughts over there andrew? Uh, no, I gotta I gotta actually get out of here pretty soon. So okay Well, we are actually just at the end of our super chats. Uh, good timing there Uh, we'll get the last one here and it's for you. Andrew. Stay curious two dollars. So Noah's flood happened Andrew. Yeah Yes, yes. All right But religion does give makes you believe that you could have a mythological story Uh about god drowning the world including babies That did nothing wrong Right babies the life on earth that didn't do anything wrong the animals drowns them all builds a big boat It's somehow humanity survives Yeah, this is yeah, this is anti scientific beliefs once again Believing in things that aren't factually true about the world believing in mythology leads to dangerous No, you think you think it's anti scientific that i'm anti scientific Yeah, if you think can you tell me yes, then no, if you believe the know is our thing happy Well, then just answer one question for me. What's the scientific method? You want me to give you the definition? You mean no, just tell me Oh, I'm not gonna do it off top of my head. No, because you don't know it because you don't know the scientific method Yeah, I couldn't quote you the scientific method off the top of my head I know yeah, I know but does that make a difference of what none of you It's funny because anytime anytime you guys bring up anytime you guys bring up Guys, it's funny because you don't know anything about it. You don't know anything about I'm not secular Yes, you are you just larping no, I'm not you just larp. I just accused the other person I mean, this is an argument, right? You deflect you said that the know is our story was real Yeah, I believe it's real and you're scientific and you believe in science. I do. Yeah, that's so you believe Like two of each animal boarded this this massive boat and we're saved from all the flooding Yeah, I believe it's literally true. That's a world. What yeah, that's completely all the animals repopulated all these animals Can you tell me what's unscientific about it? Well, one, I mean, we can see that there are different animals on different parts of the world That don't match up Right, there'd be no way what animals. Well, let me give you an example, right? What did these animals eat when they got off the boat? Uh, the carnivores eat well, I I assume that God would have you know, miracles up their food, right? What's uh, what's unscientific I just want to know I just want to know I just want to know well a miracle can be scientific No, yeah I'm sure it's mere miracles up their food isn't scientific. Well, hang on. Do you believe that's what you just made? Do you believe that then to speak? I don't mind going down this diverged path. I'm trying so I'm trying to figure this out I just want to make sure I get this right What is unscientific about putting two of each kind of animal on a boat? We were talking about the when the animals go well, let's start at the beginning No, no, no, I don't want to change what I was just because I want to start at the beginning and then we can move through it Yeah, two of every kind of animal would what's unscientific about that? It's the size. It doesn't match the math Okay, show me the math In the bible, you know, it actually gives you the Yes, it does gives you the actual dimension, you know that that that boat would be smaller than the titanic Show me the math. Okay. A boat smaller than the titanic could not Hold and could not hold the food. Show me Don't just talk prove it No, no, I'm not even no. Yeah, I didn't think so. No, no, no, you never answered my question about what the animals ate You just went to miracles Well, no, I just said if you're going to make these Miracle food or if you ask if you ask a question like this, you started with the basis of its unscientific Like that's fine. This is an argument. But as we walk through it, but as we walk through it You're not actually demonstrating how it would be unscientific It's unscientific because you could not fit the amount of animals there are on earth on sides of that Demonstrate that because we have the dimensions of the boat Are you saying two of every animal on earth would fit on a boat smaller than the titanic? I think it could sure You're ridiculous. Show prove it. Have you ever been on a fucking boat before? Yes You know our cruise boats our cruise boats, yes And those are way bigger than what those have you ever been on a cruise boat and you wouldn't do those Yeah, how many they hold like 5,000 a fucking cruise boat is like a small city. Yes. It's like 5,000 people, right? It's a lot of you know, you'd have to have like 10 20 000 animals. Yeah, but do you understand smaller than a Yeah, but do you understand a boat smaller than a do you understand that if you clown you understand that Arguing that you're arguing that you can fit. Yes. I am 20 000 animals. Yes. I'm arguing that smaller That's correct cruise boat. Yes cruise boat only fits. Actually. I'm arguing more and it doesn't just fit You might as well just say he just magically put them on a boat Let's know I don't need to How to know it get all the animals on a boat demonstrate for me that it's unscientific You wouldn't how did you stop pivoting and answer my question? It would be impossible for you then demonstrate that If it's if it's unscientific then demonstrating There's been a series of interruptions, but I I do feel like it would be fair just to let Andrew close this So this is really simple. I think all he said is yes, but yeah, we went down a big path If it's if it's unscientific then he should be able to demonstrate this He says we have the dimensions mathematically which we do the bible gives them So all he has to do is demonstrate mathematically that it's an impossibility And then I'll concede the argument after I look at the actual formula and we can vet it and see if it's correct or not And I can see if I can refute it or not. I think that that's totally fair and That being that he values the scientific method. I think that he would be the first one to jump on that So, uh, you know what, you know, I'll play game here. Give me one second. Let's see How many All right, we're doing this as the we're doing it Why not cruise ship hold Have a have a small interlude, but if you guys want to come back and have the largest cruise ship would be about 9 000 That's the largest cruise ship in the world, right? There would be at least 20 000 Animals at least I'm just ballpark in 20 000. You're talking way more actually, right? And if if a cruise boat that's almost double triple the size of the arc Uh, you can only hold 5 000 human beings I don't know how on earth you would possibly argue that it could hold 20 30 000 animals that are much larger than human beings Well, some of them some of them smaller and you wouldn't be able to get them on the boat either That's the first let me ask you a question. Are these people who are on this cruise ship that holds 9 000 all shoulder to shoulder What's the space dimensions between them are are the animal shoulder to shoulder they could be this why i'm asking you the question Yeah, it still wouldn't make the difference because you start then demonstrate it again You i'm asking a very specific question. Do you think the animals being shoulder to shoulder would make the difference within that size boat? I don't know. I would have to see it demonstrating. I'm comfortable. I'm comfortable with not demonstrating You know, no, I'm comfortable. You're not believing that I'm comfortable with you. I don't believe you about it Yeah, no, no, I'm comfortable with that. I think that says more about you than me Yeah, the guy doesn't know the scientific method But trying to demonstrate that it's scientifically impossible. Great great stuff big brain Like I said, you're talking about a boat the size smaller than the titanic When our biggest cruise ships are quadruple size holding 9 000 and then you're expecting to hold like 30 50 000 I just want you to demonstrate it. Plus the food. I just want you to demonstrate And scientifically there's no way you get all those animals on one boat. Can you demonstrate it? No, what you're doing is asking me to prove it's impossible for this to happen. That's No, no, it's not. No, it would be your job to show that it's possible some other time because that's your job You're making the claim. We we did take it You you made the claim it was impossible not me. Okay. Yes, and I argue for it by arguing this Yeah, but you didn't show any evidence. Hold on now. Let's let's get to the the Outros here. So I do want to give you each two minutes to do an outro But yeah, there's a lot of crosstalk going on right now. So We'll give it to you Schuyler for two minutes to do your closing Looks like I think it's very as the last word is he opened first Okay, if that's fine by you Schuyler, we'll let Andrew have an outro for up to two minutes and then we'll kick that over to you All right. Thank you. Yeah, so I mean it wasn't really much of a debate because my opponent didn't have any It literally any counter arguments to anything. He didn't even make an argument For his case really that couldn't also be applied to himself. So there's he just had nothing the whole debate was essentially about nothing It was ridiculous. There was really no point to having it at all And basically everybody has wasted all of their time by watching it. I'm not going to lie. So That's really I don't really have much else to say there. The the guy can't argue. He has no arguments All right. Well, I had a lot of fun. So, uh, yeah, if you did too hit that likes like button because we've almost cracked 200 likes on this stream Uh, we're going to kick it over to Schuyler for up to two minutes to close out his thoughts Yeah, uh, once again, I will repeat the argument that I presented religions bullshit Uh, believing in bullshit Bullshit being things that aren't true things that don't correlate to reality Lead you to dangerous beliefs that are harmful to society like bigotry against women Racism towards people of color uh intolerance towards others that don't believe the same as you um, and You know, Andrew has done a great job tonight of actually showing what religion does to your brain Uh, and how you can think, uh, you could be so anti science to think that All of the animals on earth survived on a boat Well, I god drowned everything I mean, of course all the fish would die because of oxygenation Uh, but we don't you know, that's The details of it, uh, he's not gonna really get into the problem is is like this is that's an example in my opinion About the algae where you you take scripture where you really should look at it more Oracle but decide to take the position Uh, ridiculous scientific positions Anyways, so that's the point religion Because it believes in things that aren't true and based on reality Causes human beings to come up with bad ideas that are harmful. I've given examples slavery genocide cults treating women as property Uh And there's various other ones, uh, but thank you for listening, uh under his calls. Appreciate you Awesome. Well, thank you both for coming out and having this discussion So, uh, big round of applause in the live chat for Andrew and Skyler for coming out tonight And uh, yeah, we'll definitely have a little talk here and See if these fellas want to have another discussion about all these various things because obviously they don't just disagree about One thing and uh, maybe we'll have some time to get that all fleshed out another time So, uh, to everybody out there. Thanks for coming out and we'll see you next time He's mixed with self-oppression. What am I to do but tear away when I'm boiling at the top Fires and all the shots you buy your heads the match and never starts Cut the strings before your life starts to decay from tears of blood to grit subtle after Turn around and I'll be faster Your hollow shape as a faith begins to drop That the world would be untrue at Hey everybody, thanks for coming out to uh, our debate tonight on uh, society better off with religion We got some more juicy debates coming up for you. So make sure you hit that subscribe button and uh, I hope you all don't mind uh, My guitar solos and me screaming at the end of the the show I've got lots of more tracks and none of them are copyrights. So I can just keep uh Keep seeing what you guys like uh out of the the tracks that I have to use So it's cool. Uh, we had a nice We had a fun debate. It was spicy for sure, but uh, I hope you all enjoyed it and uh Yeah, we're gonna see you guys next time. Cheers