Instigator / Pro
2
1476
rating
336
debates
40.77%
won
Topic
#4186

Oral sex between married couples male and female is not permitted or justified biblically.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
2
0

After 2 votes and with 2 points ahead, the winner is...

Mall
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
0
1709
rating
565
debates
68.23%
won
Description

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.

The con side can provide scripture to support their position but not necessarily. They can just challenge mine with an inquisition in an attempt to debunk it.

Questions concerning the topic, please leave them in the comments.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

I voted for Mall since his conduct was better and the arguments laid out better than RM. Rm had forfeited multiple rounds and his come back were the same thing over and over. I feel that Mall's arguments were weak since he did not bring to light any scriptural reference specifically noting oral sex. It was all in reference to sexual immorality, which would be done outside of marriage.

Although I do not agree with Mall on this issue, I feel he did win the debate as debate standards go.

Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Arguments were a tie. I don't think RM's point about no specific prohibition was quite addressed, but Mall had a lot of circumstantial evidence that was never addressed due to RM's forfeits. Mall's arguments weren't great, but RM dropped most of them and just repeated what he said earlier (which, to be fair, wasn't really countered either). Conduct breaks the tie in favor of Pro.