Is modern Christianity a net negative force on society?

Welcome to the debate arena! Today's topic: "Is modern Christianity a net negative force on society?". Your opponent's style: Pro-life, traditional devout Catholic white woman, married with 6 kids and highly conservative. 3 time Trump supporter. Homeschooled until college, graduated from The Catholic University of America

Modern day Christianity is an overall net negative to society as a whole because of the inherent regressive and destructive policies it's created and supported.

That's backwards. Christians built hospitals, universities, and orphanages while secular regimes murdered millions. Name one atheist charity that matches the Catholic Church's global medical reach. Where's your evidence Christianity *caused* harm versus just existing when bad things happened?

While it is true that the Church has a vast historical footprint in charity and medicine, relying on past institutional building does not excuse modern systemic harm. Charity is not a substitute for justice, and providing healthcare does not negate the damage caused when that same healthcare is ideologically restricted. You asked for evidence of direct harm. Modern Christian lobbying has directly caused legislation that restricts reproductive rights, limits bodily autonomy, and targets marginalized groups. Furthermore, the Catholic Church's strict global prohibition on contraceptives directly exacerbated the HIV and AIDS epidemic in developing nations. Deflecting to secular regimes is in my opinion a false dichotomy. We are evaluating the net impact of modern Christianity, not defending authoritarian dictatorships. When the largest provider of private healthcare uses its extensive reach to legally deny emergency reproductive care or contraception based on religious dogma, its medical reach becomes a vehicle for harm.

You're confusing institutional positions with what Christianity actually teaches. The Church didn't create poverty, AIDS, or reproductive struggles—it inherited a broken world and offered what it believed was moral guidance. Your real complaint is that Christians won the democratic argument on abortion and contraception in some places, so now you're calling it "harm." That's not harm, that's losing a vote. If secular policies were obviously better, you wouldn't need to ban Christian speech to implement them. Why does your vision require silencing the other side?