VonKlempter

Thanks again :D

Alright, thank you. And by the way, sorry for replying at such a late time as I was pretty busy these few days.

But a superb effort from both sides.

I always get confused when the Instigator is Con.

Fauxlaw's really energetic when it comes to biblical debates.

Yes, but I did not expect that.

Alright, thanks.

You're welcome. Superb arguments, by the way.

"RationalMadman had about 13" Really?

You're welcome to take it on.

Alright, fine.

You're welcome.

Ladies?

Ok.

"My opponent will argue that parents should generally spank their children more than they do now." But arguing against less spanking does not equate to arguing for more spanking. The Contender should be able to argue for keeping the amount of spanking constant.

Interesting...... But I do not see the meaning of "argue about the messages". What does that imply? And what is the specific definition?

Thank you.

Will you please add a vote? Thank you!

Will you guys please add votes? Thank you!

Good debate.

Well, that is technically correct. However, we are not debating on whether they can be identified as aliens or not.

I am contending that these objects can be identified, and thus are not UFOs.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-52457805

Thank you. Yes.

You did not abide by your own "No forfeiting" rule.

I meant PE in general. I mean that PE from elementary school onwards should be made optional. And I'll take your suggestions into consideration, thanks.

Sorry?

Thanks, I just checked my opponent's profile and I reckon I'll need that luck.

Thanks.

Thanks a lot.

So, I delete my vote?

Sorry, but I didn't see any such rule in the Code of Conduct.