Sir.Lancelot

I can't foresee any way to argue this as Con. This resolution is inherently overly one-sided.

This is a recreated debate.

I’ve borrowed TheGreatSunGod’s resolution and definitions because while most would assume the context is witchcraft.
The definitions are vague enough for me to argue a different version than the original intent.

As AdaptableRatman called it, this debate is a semantic trap.

Take your time, no need to rush into it.
The truth is there's plenty of time to wait.

I don't know if you guys are interested in debates or discussions that compare eastern asian religions with judaism or christianity, but would you guys like to vote on this?

I think it's a pretty quick read. 3-rounds

Oh hell yeah.
This is a debate of true substance

Whiteflame, Rational, or Barney will vote on this

I wouldn't overthink it.
Although I would never admit it, it has definitely happened to me many times.

In-fact, I made a worse mistake when I created this debate by miswording the resolution.: https://www.debateart.com/debates/4413-zeus-from-greek-mythology-is-more-powerful-than-the-god-of-the-bible

That's understandable, but you have real potential with what you could do here.

I approve of the debate & resolution traps you set.

If you were to do that and debate seriously, you would be unbeatable.

Paganism

I am sorry for allowing my behavior and aggression towards you to get the better of me. I have crossed the line multiple times with my words, so it is only fair you are owed an apology.

I do respect you as a person and share your same feelings about DART being too tolerant of certain views or opinions

It’s such an easy victory too because the resolution is an auto-win for Pro.

If TheGreatSunGod were taking this seriously and paying attention, he would have seen this too.

You are correct.
My trick is too obvious.

The thing is that you didn't even have to rig this debate description. You could have won this, fair and simple.

I can make any modifications if the description is incomplete

Your frustration is perfectly justified, and I promise to debate authentically and in good faith this time.

The anesthesia debate was me being completely lazy, not taking it seriously, and using cheap tricks to defy the resolution.

I shall engage passionately with this subject and give it 100% commitment

By chance, would either of you be interested in a debate about Buddhism versus Christianity or Orthodoxy vs Catholicism?

I realize Orthodoxy and Buddhism exist in separate categories, but I’ve been interested in the subject recently and was looking to debate it.

Thank you!

I want to take a moment to address readers & voters.:

You will likely have times in debates where people feel strongly about the subject you are debating, which has the potential for confrontation in the comments.
Avoid these at all costs. It will derail the debate and could influence voters against you. Especially if you end up giving away the arguments you intend to use for later rounds.
That's as good as showing your hand of cards. Do not do this.

Con only had one way to win, which relied on successfully executing the trap. By using the technique that I did in Round 1, I've already won. As Con here has already played all his cards, whereas I still have an entire deck to use.
Now there's no way for Con to win, as this debate was a double-edged sword. By flipping the other side of the coin, the Con position is basically self-sabotage.

I appreciate your help!

The Pro position on this is definitely a great opportunity for a free-win, but I may not necessarily be the guy to pull it off.
It's less of a debate of skill at this point and more about whose trap is superior.

This debate is a trap, but I have a counter-move to play that I believe is a better reverse trap.
It depends on successful execution.

Thank you. This will be a fun debate.

That is actually a clever strategy IMO.

All too often, debates can get derailed a lot of times in the comments. For the record, I don't object to your methods. I see it as a clever ruse, but I do believe the strategy is entirely exploitable by Pro. That is, assuming that Pro plays his cards correctly.

Thank you, Barney.

I'll post the link in my Round 1.

You are completely right about the setup and the Con position.

But I can't help but feel that the criticism towards fauxlaw comes off a little too aggressively.

It is true that a debate like this is intended as a trap, but the site culture normalizes and encourages tactics like these. If all debaters were to fight fairly, then lesser experienced contenders would be unprepared to defend themselves whenever the instigator decides to fight dirty.

Strong first round 1 from Con.
I look forward to the rest

Perhaps that was Con's intention, but the Pro position is definitely winnable.

No, you're right.
Labeling this a bait&switch isn't fair because the setup makes the case very straightforward. It's not a trick.

I knew you were Con before I even clicked this.
I knew it was a bait and switch

Thank you for supporting Best.Korea's decision to reform.

You may be right. But why play games and risk finding out?

You clearly have the dedication and ability to debate competently.
But why do you choose to troll? Is it entertaining for you or are you getting something else out of it?

Ohhh hell yeahh!!
I wish we had more of these that compare other religions to other religions. Protestantism vs Orthodox/Catholic debates are way more interesting than Atheism vs Christian debates.

Would you be open to debating FishChaser?
Islam vs Christianity?

FishChaser made a couple of religious debates, I'm thinking he would agree to it

You can do it. I believe in you.

Great job formatting and debating this

This is a very interesting subject.
Great topic choice for discussion.

There’s lots of room for conversation about economy statistics versus systems of policy that haven’t been tested yet

Atheist for now.

I’ve been conducting independent studies of different denominations for research. I’m mostly familiar with mormonism because I’ve studied it the longest. (It has a very cultlike vibe and their teachings are weird.)

With protestant denominations, I’ve been around the block.: Nazarene, methodist, lutheran, anglican.
Most recently, I began attending The Orthodox Church. Even participated in a few of the catechist classes, but I’ve made no secret that I have no intention of converting right away, if at all. So I actively decided against becoming a catechumen.
Orthodoxy is still an option, but I’ve completely ruled out mormonism or catholicism.

Outside of christianity, I’ve also started participating in eastern religions as a curious outsider or neutral observer.:
All the different buddhist monasteries (meditation, making food.), hinduism.

What denomination of christianity are you?

Welcome to the site.

"Just so everyone understands, I never agreed to any truce with Lancelot but ironically Lancelot proceeded to post this:"

Umm, yes you did. Here is proof.

https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/9787-dart-policy-proposal?page=1&post_number=24

Keep lying.

It's all you're good for anyway.

Spoken like a true white supremacist cuck.

It's not a trap debate, you fucking retard.
You're just shit at debating like you are at everything else, and this is an example of one of your many shortcomings.

Perhaps, I misworded it.

I was going to ignore you if you insisted on dragging on this "war."
You agreed to the truce which doesn't require me to ignore you, only to be civil.

If the vote-bombing is what causes you to leave the site, then that 'win' is technically someone else's.
As I have said countless times, I did not arrange it and I am not the one pulling strings.

"Lancelot can only end up hurt if he hurts me from now on, so there is no point not accepting."

No.
If I wanted to, I would destroy your mental health all over again so you left the site for a second time with no consequence to myself.
And still remain unfazed and remorseless.

The truce is a courtesy, not a necessity.
I'm not refusing to attack you for you or myself.
It's because there is no point.

You agreed to the terms of the truce, but you keep breaking it.
It is possible for us to dislike each other and still be civil, but if you want to escalate and get personal, we can do that too.
We can call off the truce anytime you like.

These are some pretty harsh comments to make to somebody you consider your friend.

This truce is my first step towards the light.

I appreciate you hearing me out and accepting the alliance, my friend.

It's not my fault, so I don't feel bad for you and I don't feel guilty.

But if I agree to give you free Elo, does this mean you will hold up your end of the bargain and agree to a truce?

So just to be clear, you will accept my truce, assuming I do all of that.