Looking for qualified/interested volunteers

[RendeR]

I am trying to put together a discussion, the description is below, please read this and PM me here if you are interested in being one of the 7 people involved. I will have people register in the forum on my website to do this (to avoid undue annoyance both for people here and for those of us following it on my site.)

the forum for this is located here:

http://www.majecc.net/mainboard


Anyone is welcomed to register and view the discussion, I request that any discussion of what the litigants post be done in a seperate thread to avoid clutter (as the admin I will enforce this)

description:

Religion on Trial: Pros and Cons of Piety

This is a personal attempt to see just how well we can thresh out real information about two sides of an argument. pro Religion and Con Religion.

The base question this trial will attempt to answer is this:

Does humanity require religious belief to succeed and grow both physically and morally?

There will be a panel of three judges (judge1,judge2,judge3)

there will be 2 prosecutors (con religion) (pros1, pros2)

There will be 2 defendors (pro religion) (def1, def2)

Each persons identity will be confidential to prevent prior commentary from tainting the judges opinions and to keep the judges identities from influencing the attorney's arguements as well.

The discussion will go on until both sides rest their case, at which point the judges will each render their opinion of the case as provided and give reasons for doing so.


Now please note, this is not intended to be any sort of recommendation or condemnation of religion, but truly to try and bring out arguements for boths sides and perhaps help everyone reading this to understand the ideas better.

[Peregrine]

Umm, not to bash you or your idea (which sounds interesting) RendeR, but why would aficionados of a sports text sim be the best people to discuss this? If you're putting religion on trial wouldn't you want ministers etc?

[AgPete]

Umm, not to bash you or your idea (which sounds interesting) RendeR, but why would aficionados of a sports text sim be the best people to discuss this? If you're putting religion on trial wouldn't you want ministers etc?

We're not real heavy into religion unless there's some neat stats and excel charts to back it up. :)

[John Galt]

I have no real interest in participating in the project, but I would suggest that your initial question is too heavily slanted.

"Does humanity require religious belief to succeed and grow both physically and morally?"

The word "require" is the primary problem. I think it would be extremely hard for the religious folk to prove that religion is required for success and growth.

[RendeR]

Perigrin: There are a number of religious authority figures associated with this board, I am hoping to get at least one of not both defenders slots filled by them

Agpete, funny, but not relevant, =)

John: You may be correct, can you suggest a better wording to get the idea across that I'm looking for? What I want to have debated is wether there is a need for organized religion, would people still succeed, be moral and lead healthy lives if we never saw organized religion at all?


We have 2 judges positions filled currently. Still looking for attorneis for both sides and one more judge.

[RendeR]

damn but I canot type today......

[John Galt]

Perigrin: There are a number of religious authority figures associated with this board, I am hoping to get at least one of not both defenders slots filled by them

Agpete, funny, but not relevant, =)

John: You may be correct, can you suggest a better wording to get the idea across that I'm looking for? What I want to have debated is wether there is a need for organized religion, would people still succeed, be moral and lead healthy lives if we never saw organized religion at all?


We have 2 judges positions filled currently. Still looking for attorneis for both sides and one more judge.

Even "need" seems slanted, IMO (unless that is all that you want to debate). I would think something like, "overall, religion has contributed to ..." would be a better way of framing things.

[RendeR]

I'll take a shot at rewriting it in a bit, thanks for the input!

[CamEdwards]

how do you say "kangaroo court" in Latin? :)

[Easy Mac]

how do you say "kangaroo court" in Latin? :)
Bush administration? :)

[RendeR]

how do you say "kangaroo court" in Latin? :)


I am trying to keep this from getting tainted either way Cam, this is why the judges and litigants are all going to stay anonymous. It will help keep the discussion a bit more level and fair to both sides.

[Peregrine]

We have religious authority figures on the board? Is the Pope here using an alias or something? Sorry, that just seems like a funny turn of phrase.

[Fritz]

who would be unqualified?

[RendeR]

Peregrin: I consider men of the cloth authority figures as i am not affiliated with any specific church or faith, so they have weight with me when they state their opinions. Fritz for example, would not be qualified as a defender of the faith, but perhaps he would as a prosecuter for the non believers ;)


Fritz: see previous ;)

[RendeR]

Also, please note folks, I'm not looking for a final yes /no this is how it must be result to this, what I want to see happen is two sides really bring out some strong arguments for their opinions, a really solid debate with support both for and against. this is an activity in learning, not a witch hunt with lynchings at midnight.