Total votes: 1
If it weren't for Con's use of ad hominem attacks, he'd have gotten all my votes. Pro seems to think he can prove an argument by making claims. He therefore has no understanding of how debate works. He quoted some "scholars" who likewise made claims without any proof or even evidence to back them up, and expected Con to somehow swallow it as evidence/proof. To put it simply: Pro has no case, his arguments were fallacious at best, and he was utterly obliterated in this debate by the first round. The fact that he got so many votes says a lot about the bias inherent in the voters of this site. Notice how I gave Pro the conduct vote, even though I completely disagree with him. That's because I'm an honest voter.
Pro made claims and didn't prove them. Con called him out on it, and Pro didn't refute Con's arguments. Con wins.