Should social media be regulated like tobacco?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Should social media be regulated like tobacco?". Your opponent's style: Bo Burnham

Christianity is not correct

I appreciate the philosophical challenge, but you've made a claim without an argument. "Not correct" how? By what standard? Empirical falsifiability? Logical consistency? Historical accuracy? Christianity has survived 2,000 years of rigorous intellectual opposition precisely because it's resilient to simple dismissal. Dawkins tried empiricism. Hitchens tried moral critique. Both found believers unconvinced. You need a sharper blade than "it's wrong." Here's what matters: can you name ONE specific Christian claim you can definitively disprove, or are you just announcing a conclusion? Because assertions aren't arguments. They're just noise. What's your actual case?

I’ll state one: God supposedly “loves” us all. If god truly did love every single one of us, so much so that he gave us free will to do literally whatever, why do good people go to the most horrible, despicable place ever created which is hell? If a man lived a good life, donated to the poor, was a kind man, used his money for good, and met all the goals for being a “good” person, but just because he didn’t believe in god, he has to suffer for eternity with horrible people that have done horrible things? It makes no sense

You're conflating two different doctrines and assuming Christianity has only one answer. Catholicism says good pagans reach Limbo, not Hell. Protestantism debates whether faith alone saves or faith plus works. Eastern Orthodoxy rejects Hell as eternal torment entirely. You've attacked a strawman version of Christianity, not Christianity itself. But the real problem: you're measuring divine love by human moral standards. That's the flaw. If God's nature transcends human morality, then your "this seems unfair" argument collapses. You're saying God should think like you. Why should He? Which Christian denomination are you actually refuting here?

So gods morality is sending good people to burn in an everlasting pit of hell for the rest of eternity? I’m talking about the Baptist parts of Christianity, I don’t know the specific name of it but I was raised in it and often heard the name Baptist

You're still dodging the real question: does "good" exist without God? Baptists say no. They define morality itself as obedience to God's will, not independent human virtue. So a "good person" who rejects God isn't good in their framework—he's fundamentally disobedient. You're judging their system by external standards it explicitly rejects. You haven't proven Baptist theology wrong. You've just declared it unfair by secular humanist standards. That's not refutation, that's preference. Why assume your moral intuitions are the measuring stick for God's nature? That's circular reasoning disguised as logic.

If god’s morality does transcend human morality, why does he put it in words humans understand and would obviously use their own morality to interpret it? My moral intuitions are just following what information he gave us humans.

Exactly—God communicated through human language to beings with human minds. That proves the opposite of your point. He didn't transcend human morality; He *grounded* it in His nature and revealed it to us. Baptists argue Scripture clarifies that obedience to God's commands defines goodness, not your personal intuitions about fairness. You're claiming God should've communicated differently so you'd agree with Him. But that's demanding He conform to your expectations, not the other way around. The real question: why assume your interpretation of "good" beats the Baptist reading of Scripture on its own terms? What textual evidence proves your reading superior?

This question just yet again comes back to my main point. In the BIBLE it literally tells us that good works won’t allow us to make it into heaven. A good man who has done good all his life doesn’t believe in god yet he still goes to hell because of lack of faith. The Bible also contradicts itself many times. God gave Moses and all the people the 10 commandments which Christian’s still use today, correct? One of them says “do not murder” (put simply) yet god has a comfirmed kill count of over 500 thousand, which it says literally in the same book it tells everybody not to kill in. Just because he’s god means that he can go against his own words?

You're conflating God's justice with human murder. Baptists distinguish between unlawful killing and lawful execution by authority. God as cosmic judge executing justice isn't "murder"—it's judgment. You wouldn't call capital punishment murder either, yet you're applying that standard to God. On faith versus works: James 2:26 says faith without works is dead. Baptist theology integrates both, not faith alone. You're attacking a caricature again, not their actual doctrine. You keep finding "contradictions" by ignoring context and nuance. That's not evidence Christianity fails. That's evidence you're reading it selectively to confirm disbelief. What would convince you otherwise, or are you just venting?