Theology & Religion in Debate

When combined, Christianity and Islam alone have over 3 billion followers globally. Just Islam and Christianity by themselves. Granted, they are the two most prominent Abrahamic religions, but it doesn’t even begin to account for all the other religions and spiritual practices many people practice. You might be asking, “What’s the punchline?” The issue is that nearly all high school and collegiate debate leagues avoid these topics at all costs despite their immensely large following and debated topics. You might find this obvious initially, but upon deeper inspection, you’ll see it shouldn’t be this way. Let’s talk about it.

We have to understand why these topics are avoided at first. In the case of religion, the usual argument is that religion would have undesirable emotional escalations in rounds. Religion is tied to personal identity and deeply held beliefs, more so than, say, tax policy or environmental regulations, and when challenged, debaters—especially younger ones—might struggle to keep things civil because of the severity of religious polarization.

Another factor is the risk of bias or unfairness. Judges, coaches, or debaters might bring their own religious leanings into the mix. A devout judge might score a faith-based argument higher, or an atheistic judge might dismiss it outright. Unlike more data-driven topics, bias seems like it will have a much greater effect when it comes to religion and theology in debate.

Both of these reasons and many others hold merit, but when it comes to the context of high school and collegiate debate, the integrity of these arguments starts to be undermined. Now that we know why these topics are generally avoided, let’s talk about why, contrary to popular view, we should allow far more religious debate in these settings

The Problem With Avoiding Religion

Debate exists to stimulate intellectual growth. The purpose of debate isn’t merely to develop argumentative skills in a vacuum but to train students to think about the most challenging and foundational ideas in society. Religion is among the most influential forces in human history. It has shaped laws, moral norms, governments, and wars. To exclude it is to deliberately omit a critical domain of intellectual and civic discourse. The educational aim is critical thinking, not comfort. Despite the greater emotion that may be attached to it, if students are never exposed to rigorous religious and anti-religious argumentation, they are intellectually underprepared.

Avoiding religion doesn’t make debate more inclusive; it makes it less honest. Students come from diverse backgrounds, and many hold religious beliefs that inform their perspectives. Silencing discussion on religion also means pretending those influences don’t exist, which is neither neutral nor fair. Debate thrives on disagreement; shielding participants from religious topics assumes they can’t handle the tension.

Furthermore, suppressing religious debate undermines inclusivity. Some leagues avoid religion to avoid offending religious or non-religious students. But true inclusivity means a representation of all worldviews. Religious students have a right to engage publicly with their convictions, just as secular students have a right to challenge them. Many debate topics provoke strong emotions: abortion, race, gender identity, capital punishment, and war, to name a few. Yet, these are widely accepted in debate. To single out religion for exclusion means assuming it is uniquely volatile, which is false. All debate topics risk bias as well. There is no real reason to exclude religion.

We have to realize that students must be equipped for real-world conversation. Religious questions are pivotal in law, medicine, education, bioethics, international politics, etc. Students who cannot articulate or rebut religious arguments are intellectually disarmed in real-world dialogues.

The exclusion of religion from high school and collegiate debate is a failure of intellectual courage and educational responsibility. A free and educated society must equip students to talk about religion rationally, charitably, and rigorously and not avoid it for fear of controversy. Our brilliance depends on our diligence

With kind regards,

Remi Kojo

The Forensic Funnel Team