"I have a kid too whom I kiss on lips and sometime we play where we touch each others tongue too. "
What the fuck lol. You are either a troll or deranged. You absolutely should not be french kissing your son. You should hug them or maybe a kiss on the cheek not lips WTF
As president I command you to ban tigerlord( the guy who wears dresses and is an open pedophile apologist) from voting. he admits he only votes when he agrees with a position and his RFDs are crafted to justify a win for the side he agrees with.
We should probably just ban muslims from voting at all. you see every other group willing to engage with logic and vote against positions they believe in and this is absent from those. plus these people are both pedophiles with the highest regions of child marraiges in the world. https://www.girlsnotbrides.org/learning-resources/child-marriage-atlas/atlas/
they are also likely intellectually incapable of being logical due to the high rate of inbreeding. ilhan omer married her brother for god sake but the whole incest thing is common among muslims, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_in_the_Middle_East
plus they are intellectually dishonest as they simultaneously ban being a fag while also wearing dresses and worshipping a guy who admits to sucking the tongue of young boys..
Musnad Ahmad 16245—[Mua’wiya said]: "I saw the prophet sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali, may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented
I need to grow up but you literally can't remove the emotional and feminine part of your brain that forces you to be logical? It's all
"that side won but their conclusion hurts my feelings so I can't vote for them"
Literally stop being a female. I should expect this though given you worship somebody who wrote of sucking on the tongue of a little boy and you literally wear a dress.
" My nature is I do not give vote against my moral values.
So its better to give Tie then unjust vote."
SO how debates work is you vote fir which side won, not which side agrees with you. You aren't voting on if the person is correct so kind of retarded take.
"TBH it would not be unjust vote if I could put more time in the debate there was good room to vote against bones"
Admitting you wouldn't vote for the side that won if you had more time but instead would use the time to try and justify a vote for the side you agree with. I wish this wasn't typical but you guys crash planes into civilian buildings and as we saw with hamas, you also literally will go into countries and rape and torture random civilians including little boys. SO it doesn't surprise me that given the choice of an evil vs non evil action you would choose evil.
Not to be on bones dick too hard but this is literally the best argument I have ever seen for murdering innocent children. It makes me consider supporting the murder of them myself. Except of course the pro choice people never stop at sentience they always want to take abortion a step further.
This is true. The Quran never calls the Bible corrupt it is saying the worshippers have corrupted the message. The reason that con can take a verse about "the book" and nitpick about it is because Muhammad was a very shitty theologian and actually thought the Bible was a single book and not a collection of books. He also messed up in other places for example he thought the. Trinity included the virgin Mary and you see several references to it in the Quran.
His plan for assuming these religions was to just claim the religions predicted him. It backfired one time when he was trying to assume a bunch of pagans by calling their religion correct and assuming then but he has too much push back from the monotheist he converted at the point of the sword (again shitty theologian you can't really convert people any other way and Muslims now are people who are brainwashed into it). So he then took back calling the pagans correct
Lintards- we should have race based hiring aka DEI black history month and Juneteenth but also people should not be proud of their identity based traits such as race, gender or sexual orientation.
you have to look at umbrellas vote I wouldn't say this if i disagreed with his vote, i am only saying it because it's obviously insufficient and I think the debate has a clear winner
Bro, BOP is always on the one making a claim. Why can't Muslims be as good as Christians and just be unbiased. Like Christians if they see an atheist win an argument will vote for an atheist but you guys just have to disobey Allah by being liars. And biased. Sad
The debate title would have to be changed since it asks if the argument is sound and all competent rebuttals get around the soundness of the argument as it is undeniable.
If you give me your rebuttal for Godel's ontological argument to show why his math proof is wrong right here than I might consider it.
I don't want to waste my time because you pretty much have to be a mathematician to understand Godel and have a good grasp of the S5 system of logic. If this is your first time hearing the name Godel or hearing "S5 system of logic" than you have not researched this enough for a rebuttal and since nobody has ever been able to disprove Godel's mathematical proof than I doubt you can. Just give me a one sentence explaining what your rebuttal will be and if I feel like it's something I never heard or that it works than I will accept a debate.
People say this but the left was always statist
So I have been victim blaming this whole time?
Lets get this straight I don't blaspheme Allah, you do when you claim obvious frauds or pedophiles are his prophets
Child assault is more common in western countries even though you guys marry 12 year olds?
"I have a kid too whom I kiss on lips and sometime we play where we touch each others tongue too. "
What the fuck lol. You are either a troll or deranged. You absolutely should not be french kissing your son. You should hug them or maybe a kiss on the cheek not lips WTF
Just banned from voting
As president I command you to ban tigerlord( the guy who wears dresses and is an open pedophile apologist) from voting. he admits he only votes when he agrees with a position and his RFDs are crafted to justify a win for the side he agrees with.
We should probably just ban muslims from voting at all. you see every other group willing to engage with logic and vote against positions they believe in and this is absent from those. plus these people are both pedophiles with the highest regions of child marraiges in the world. https://www.girlsnotbrides.org/learning-resources/child-marriage-atlas/atlas/
they are also likely intellectually incapable of being logical due to the high rate of inbreeding. ilhan omer married her brother for god sake but the whole incest thing is common among muslims, https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cousin_marriage_in_the_Middle_East
plus they are intellectually dishonest as they simultaneously ban being a fag while also wearing dresses and worshipping a guy who admits to sucking the tongue of young boys..
Musnad Ahmad 16245—[Mua’wiya said]: "I saw the prophet sucking on the tongue or the lips of Al-Hassan son of Ali, may the prayers of Allah be upon him. For no tongue or lips that the prophet sucked on will be tormented
"conservatism is childish and feminine for your societies"
I stopped reading here. the fact you think its childish to oppose kids transitioning and promote border security is retarded.
I need to grow up but you literally can't remove the emotional and feminine part of your brain that forces you to be logical? It's all
"that side won but their conclusion hurts my feelings so I can't vote for them"
Literally stop being a female. I should expect this though given you worship somebody who wrote of sucking on the tongue of a little boy and you literally wear a dress.
" My nature is I do not give vote against my moral values.
So its better to give Tie then unjust vote."
SO how debates work is you vote fir which side won, not which side agrees with you. You aren't voting on if the person is correct so kind of retarded take.
"TBH it would not be unjust vote if I could put more time in the debate there was good room to vote against bones"
Admitting you wouldn't vote for the side that won if you had more time but instead would use the time to try and justify a vote for the side you agree with. I wish this wasn't typical but you guys crash planes into civilian buildings and as we saw with hamas, you also literally will go into countries and rape and torture random civilians including little boys. SO it doesn't surprise me that given the choice of an evil vs non evil action you would choose evil.
Why should a person retain rights, one they become comatose?
Seems arbitrary to draw a line there
We're you arguing devil's advocate or is that your position IRL? NOT THE conclusion but the argument
You won't believe me but that's not sarcasm. Con wins the debate. A week earned win, despite being factually wrong. Imo.
Not to be on bones dick too hard but this is literally the best argument I have ever seen for murdering innocent children. It makes me consider supporting the murder of them myself. Except of course the pro choice people never stop at sentience they always want to take abortion a step further.
You also didn't read all of the debate so not reading the reason for the removal of your vote is expected
Can you confirm that if you could vote in this debate you would vote against yourself?
"Asian is better than white, unless its chinese asian or something."
I will give you Japanese women specifically. Korean fembboys do not count though
I just know that you should be ashamed of your race as a non white.
I assume you are a cum skin (term for crackers) based on the profile pic.
Thank you my cracka
I vote on who won. I don't care about agreement. I am pro life and I still chose the winner correctly of savant vs bones
No reason to be proud of my ethnicity?
I am literally white though
This is true. The Quran never calls the Bible corrupt it is saying the worshippers have corrupted the message. The reason that con can take a verse about "the book" and nitpick about it is because Muhammad was a very shitty theologian and actually thought the Bible was a single book and not a collection of books. He also messed up in other places for example he thought the. Trinity included the virgin Mary and you see several references to it in the Quran.
His plan for assuming these religions was to just claim the religions predicted him. It backfired one time when he was trying to assume a bunch of pagans by calling their religion correct and assuming then but he has too much push back from the monotheist he converted at the point of the sword (again shitty theologian you can't really convert people any other way and Muslims now are people who are brainwashed into it). So he then took back calling the pagans correct
I boosted this btw
Lintards- we should have race based hiring aka DEI black history month and Juneteenth but also people should not be proud of their identity based traits such as race, gender or sexual orientation.
Your welcome. Typically I add "anytime" but it's hard to judge a debate in less than 3 hours so it's a pretty intense effort to do it.
"You don't have a bone of urgency in your body and I love it."
Thanks I appreciate this and even though it's pedantic if you feel like it please give some examples.
con did not make a bodily autonomy argument for example
you have to look at umbrellas vote I wouldn't say this if i disagreed with his vote, i am only saying it because it's obviously insufficient and I think the debate has a clear winner
I will have my son play you then if that's cool
You ready to go tonight fool
It would literally make them pussies if they couldn't handle the questioning of a historical event so yes you did
Are the Jewish mods pussies?
That question is more antisemitic than any debate on the historicity of events
So we disproved the narrative of Barney banning the topic.
Citation of that occurring I need it as evidence the Holocaust definitely happened
If you don't like the position I am taking, feel free to accept as con
I am defending that the Holocaust happened so I can't get in trouble . However I get a feeling whoever accepts this debate will be banned
You wanna debate this bro?
Ghandi was literally fighting for freedom from the British and for freedom from his base instincts while Hitler was fighting for control. Like you are
AR you are going to hell for literally arguing God is more like Hitler while your opponent he is more like Ghandi and respects freedom
I didn't report that vote BTW. I thought it was fair but I just disagreed with it.
It's not a shared bop. It's all on pro but even if the bop is not on pro than it worst it is evenly split. Literally ask any seasoned debater.
Do you know how BOP works?
Bro, BOP is always on the one making a claim. Why can't Muslims be as good as Christians and just be unbiased. Like Christians if they see an atheist win an argument will vote for an atheist but you guys just have to disobey Allah by being liars. And biased. Sad
The debate title would have to be changed since it asks if the argument is sound and all competent rebuttals get around the soundness of the argument as it is undeniable.
Oddly enough I can provide an argument and defeat David here. I just don't think you can bro
If you give me your rebuttal for Godel's ontological argument to show why his math proof is wrong right here than I might consider it.
I don't want to waste my time because you pretty much have to be a mathematician to understand Godel and have a good grasp of the S5 system of logic. If this is your first time hearing the name Godel or hearing "S5 system of logic" than you have not researched this enough for a rebuttal and since nobody has ever been able to disprove Godel's mathematical proof than I doubt you can. Just give me a one sentence explaining what your rebuttal will be and if I feel like it's something I never heard or that it works than I will accept a debate.
If con is going to use AI to write his arguments I wonder if he would be fine with me having AI vote on this debate
I also understand this argument too well to vote fairly so I will abstain.
Everyone that debates against the modal ontological argument seem to never take the time to actually understand it.
Playing the lottery can lead to six figures so you made a great decision and are in no way a midwits.