Instigator / Pro
4
1392
rating
31
debates
16.13%
won
Topic

Sexual intercourse has a uniform design.

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
3
Sources points
2
2
Spelling and grammar points
1
1
Conduct points
1
0

With 1 vote and 2 points ahead, the winner is ...

RationalMadman
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
People
Time for argument
Three days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
6
1672
rating
283
debates
66.96%
won
Description
~ 1,461 / 5,000

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes. For clarity or questions, Please send a message or comment prior to accepting debate.
In spite of all the forms of contraception including abortion, Recreational purposes and hedonistic agendas, Male and female sexual relations has a uniform design for a reproduction of life. With this attitude, Many problems surrounding sexual activity can be cleared up.
Sexual intercourse, When used as a business, A recreational party, Personal gain and instant gratification, Brings about a series of breakdowns. That's in our well being and health, In our relationships with people and not last but in our financial matters.
A huge strain is made with the attitude taken to coitus to be just a stress reliever like a cigarette. Like it's a high with liquor or any of the variations of intoxicants.
So with this solid attitude towards this thing as the topic statement describes, It is true. It will change the face of child abandonment.
Please comment, Send a message for clarity or questions

Round 1
Pro
The description will serve as the first round.
Con
DISCLAIMER 
=============
This is obviously an adult/mature debate don't read it if you don't know about sex or shouldn't be discussing it online.

=============



How do you explain that each penis is unique, each sperm cell unique and each vagina and egg the same?

What about foreplay? Do dildos count?

Where is your evidence that it's even designed?
Round 2
Pro
"How do you explain that each penis is unique, each sperm cell unique and each vagina and egg the same?"

I explain it by unique genetic makeup. Likened to unique eye color, skin color, nose size, foot size, etc.


"What about foreplay? Do dildos count?"


What about it? What does it have to do with coitus (sexual intercourse)?


"Where is your evidence that it's even designed?"

Design means structure or formation. So whatever we see or look at is physically evident that it's configured. It's made up of what? Features and elements that allow a function in that design. Which in turn carries out a duty or result. It's by the result according to the structure that communicates the purpose and intent.

Once you look up these terms: design, function, structure and learn a lot of the synonymous language, you can begin to build an understanding of these things.



Con
So because it involves a penis entering a vagina each and every time, it therefore is uniform? That is most ridiculous to suggest.

Also, how do you explain different sex positions? How about kinks?
Round 3
Pro
"So because it involves a penis entering a vagina each and every time, it therefore is uniform? That is most ridiculous to suggest."

What is uniform? It's pretty much standard procedure. A non-deviating one at that. Something that is constantly what it is each and every time. You tell me when SEXUAL intercourse is sometimes something other than what it is. 
I'm not suggesting it's uniform just like eating vegetables for nutrition has no need for suggesting or proposing it's a uniform operation. This is an occurrence always within these things.

I'm also not proposing that the sexual organs have a function. Why? It's evident and it's innate. If you're saying these organs don't have a function, this is where you make your case. Do you know what I mean ?


"Also, how do you explain different sex positions? How about kinks?"

I don't get your rationale. Every sex position WITH SEXUAL INTERCOURSE as described in the premise, has sexual intercourse.
I don't know what you mean by "kinks" exactly. But let's put it this way being that all these questions don't appear to have any follow up and that is simply put , anything that leads or ends up in sexual INTERCOURSE is SEXUAL intercourse.

Again, when is sexual INTERCOURSE not what it is? Just keep that in mind , what the end result is. We can have multiple scenarios and elements involved. Once we get to the destination of coitus, it's function is constant. There's a reason to that. There's a reason all these different things happen in and around this act. Some how all these things as we can see lead us to that act.


Con
Forfeited
Round 4
Pro
So to continue on, the design of coitus is of uniformity due to  the function never changing, always working the same way every time.


I understand people make look at other things involved that can vary, that's why the context is specific here under the set of circumstances that have been laid out.


The result is always the reproduction of life according to the design of sexual organs. So therefore it is a uniform intent there in and of their makeup. Now there are factors that can derail the function . What can disrupt fertilization doesn't change what the design is. The design has been established to do a specific thing. A tire will do nothing but roll. That makes it functional. Even if it goes flat, we know that's dysfunctional as it's not in accordance with its design. With no disruptions, it's use continues on exactly as to what it was made for within that use.




All the features in sexual organs like everything else show the direction of duty when we observe conception. See we can continue to observe from one element or multiple elements to the next.


With this self evident anatomical physiological communication, we can see how the topic statement is true.


Do people have their own intent when engaging in sexual intercourse? Indeed, like many other things. Like using a tire for a planter. Like attempting to use an armrest for a seat. 




The point is, separate the fundamental focus from your own plot of difference.





















Con
uniform
adjective
the same; not changing or different in any way

design noun (PLAN)
C1 
a drawing or set of drawings showing how a building or product is to be made and how it will work and look:
B1 

(also designing)
the art of making plans or drawings for something:
B1
the way in which something is planned and made

I have seen several admissions by Pro that there is a lot of non-uniform variation in sexual intercourse surrounding its build-up, the precise tool size and interaction based on lubrication and such.

What I have failed to see is any sign whatsoever of design.

It's also curious why Pro rules out a dildo as being a valid tool to engage in the intercourse with, since a condom-covered dick has just as little skin-on-skin during the intercourse. This implies that Pro himself sees there to be something unique and special about sexual intercourse between two humans specifically (rather than a simulation with a toy) and what makes it special is actually the variation in foreplay, tempo during and the aftermath.

I conclude also that there is no designer or 'design'. Pro has not proven God to exist throughout this debate and when asked what designed it or what specifically the design is, Pro asks us to assume it automatically was designed purely because it has a pattern of intercourse... Doesn't seem like a met burden of proof to me.
Round 5
Pro
"I have seen several admissions by Pro that there is a lot of non-uniform variation in sexual intercourse surrounding its build-up, the precise tool size and interaction based on lubrication and such. "


Several admissions such as what ?


What other form of penile-vaginal penetration is there? Each person has only ONE sexual organ. The female has one orifice to her organ. Excluding outlier cases of deformity, anyhow the context deals with life reproduction.  How is reproducing anything else than what reproducing is? When is there ever any change in that? It appears that the focus is not centralized here. 


I can use a variety of screwdrivers and sizes of screws. I can use a cheap or expensive screwdriver. But the design of the screwdriver is constant in order to function as constant. The screwdriver in its use will always drive a screw into the surface. When it doesn't , it's called malfunction.


"What I have failed to see is any sign whatsoever of design."


What is design? It is structure, shape, form, an arrangement of sorts. It's whatever it is when you see something like your screen here. It's as straightforward as that.


"It's also curious why Pro rules out a dildo as being a valid tool to engage in the intercourse with, since a condom-covered dick has just as little skin-on-skin during the intercourse."


We have to keep in mind without exception, the reproduction of life. I know it can get tricky going in depth into these things. So to keep focus at the epicenter, under what set of circumstances are we talking about?


Those things you mentioned don't relate do they?


"This implies that Pro himself sees there to be something unique and special about sexual intercourse between two humans specifically (rather than a simulation with a toy) and what makes it special is actually the variation in foreplay, tempo during and the aftermath."


Are we talking about sex or what's leading up to it? You have to get down to the bottom line. Please distinguish between sexual intercouse and sexual activity so the focus of what something is will be very clear. Once more again, these subjects can get convoluted when focus is lost.


"I conclude also that there is no designer or 'design'. Pro has not proven God to exist throughout this debate and when asked what designed it or what specifically the design is, Pro asks us to assume it automatically was designed purely because it has a pattern of intercourse... Doesn't seem like a met burden of proof to me."


Hopefully by now you understand what is meant by design. This is not an exchange about a DESIGNER, it's about the DESIGN. So this doesn't go into the territory of trying to prove who or what the designer is so I won't hold you to that.


The DESIGNER could be evolution or we have a design that always was. That's not the question.
The question is,  is sexual intercourse ever any act different from what it is to reproduce something and that something being any other thing but that something?















Con
It's neither uniform nor designed.