YouFound_Lxam

Hello Barney, I reported a vote, and would be grateful if you could look it over.

Thank you Sir. Lancelot.
I think the debate went well, and you did a fantastic job. I am not trying to take any votes away from you, but the reasoning that Sidewalker gave did not mean anything and did not have any basis, besides the fact that he thought you were right.

Forgot to tag

I have reported your vote Side walker. You give no valid reason for that vote, and it seems to be very biased.

Fact of the matter is that the Title of the Debate is does God exist, not the Islamic God, therefore any arguments pertaining to that are unusable.

BOP has to be shared and if your opponent does not believe that the Quran is legit, than you can't use that as proof.

If the debate was about the Quran, then yes you would be correct. But it had nothing to do with that topic.

"White privilege is a problem for a significant population of the USA. (Blacks make up 13.6% of US population)"

This is the part I am arguing against.

No, I'm not arguing that it is good. I am arguing that there is so little of it in the USA, that it doesn't pose a threat to anyone. If I were to argue that it doesn't exist, then my opponent could say something along the lines of there being racist people in the USA, that are in charge of small companies that use this tactic (which is true). So, I did the next best thing and claimed that the amount of it is so minute that it doesn't pose a threat to anyone.

"Be careful, you may be walking the line of specious reasoning. While we have laws against speeding, speeding and speeders still exist."

This is why I decided to go with "it's not a problem" and not "it doesn't exist."

Not supposed to be big for a first argument. I tried to make it simple and to the point.

I don't understand how I lost this debate. My opponents literally said the words, and I quote," Only two genders are based on biological sex. The rest are not and do not have to be. "
Giving me the win, because he is saying that gender is not based on a social construct, rather biological sex, contradicting his arguments.

Morally or lawfully?

I would also like to point out for anyone who missed it, that Con literally stated in one of his arguments:
"Only two genders are based on biological sex."
Therefore, accepting the idea the two genders, male and female, are based in biological sex. The other "genders that he states, wouldn't be considered genders, given the definition of them are different.

Just by this statement alone, Con contradicted his own argument.

And murder is illegal........

Nope, I used the legal definition of murder to define abortion as murder.

Because that was his WHOLE argument.

Ok, well thank you anyways white flame.
I would just like everyone to know, that Con chose a very sly tactic to try and grab this debate. If anything, he should lose conduct points, because he barely responded in the first response, and forfeited in the second. Then in his third response he pulled out an argument that didn't even argue the legal point of abortion, just the moral point of it.

I would just like everyone to put this into consideration, while voting.

So, if someone decides to put 3 sentences in one of their arguments, and forfeits another one of their arguments, that will constitute for not enough.

Guys.....does no one on this website understand this concept.

The forfeit appliance on debates, is part of the debate. It's purpose is when someone does not answer quick enough, or doesn't answer at all, they automatically forfeit.

Just because no one said anything about forfeiture in the description, doesn't make forfeits not countable. They still count whether you agree with it or not. It's literally part of the debate. It does not need to be clarified in the description.

With the logic of "Well you didn't say that one forfeiture=loss in the description, so therefore I still am in the argument" I could forfeit any debate I want, then weeks later come up with an argument, and say it counts.

Could the moderators please back me up on this.

There is a reason that the feature "forfeit" is there.

It's purpose is to forfeit a debate.
It's purpose isn't to apply it to a description to make forfeits active...…
They just already are in general.

Ah Ah Ah.......naughty naughty. Almost got me there for a second.

Yes.
Be patient.

"Heads up, we are DEBATING in your threads, get it? Huh? LOL!"
A civilized one Brother D.
Not just spewing facts about random crap.

Because most of his rebuttals were based off of him trying to disprove my arguments. He in no way provided an argument for why God most likely doesn't exist. He misinterpreted the debate.

It's hilarious how you feel so passionate about religion, yet you refuse to accept debates from anyone.

"Based on your limited data, it sounds more likely than not that most those women sent to prison for having miscarriages, would have had them regardless of drug use."
No, drugs affect miscarriages exponentially. And fact of the matter is, if they weren't using drugs, and they still had a miscarriage, then they wouldn't be sent to prison.

"Consider that not getting proper pre-natal care results in 5x deaths. Should every grieving mother who did not see the doctor enough during her pregnancy be sent to prison?"
If they had access to it and chose not to be smart and use it, then they should be tried in a court of law.
Having a child is a big deal. You shouldn't just wing it. Because if you do, things like miscarriages are more likely to happen.

I know. But he said it when you asked it, so I used it.

"Artificial Intelligence, if it was not obvious..."

He said AI

What do you mean when you say physical discipline?

Something similar to spanking?
Or beating?

Because there is a difference.

Could you elaborate on what cases would be bad, compared to what cases it would be okay?

"While miscarriage is extremely common, occurring in up to 25% of recognized pregnancies,4 prenatal substance use heightens the risk.5 The risks of miscarriage for each individual woman depends on the specific substance being abused and the amount and frequency of use."
https://lagunatreatment.com/support-for-women/increase-risk-miscarriage/

forgot to tag.

https://www.themarshallproject.org/2022/09/01/they-lost-their-pregnancies-then-prosecutors-sent-them-to-prison
"But many medical experts say the causes of miscarriage and stillbirth are complex and often unclear, and there isn’t scientific proof that using methamphetamine or other drugs causes pregnancy loss. Healthy babies are delivered every day to people who used drugs while pregnant."

How can you trust an article that says doing hard drugs while you are pregnant actually does not affect miscarriages?

https://lagunatreatment.com/support-for-women/increase-risk-miscarriage/

"All tested positive for drugs."

It was a miscarriage caused by drugs. Still the mother's fault. Not accidental.

"Interestingly, women are occasionally already sent to prison for accidental miscarriages."

Care to elaborate?

No.

Yes. Could you elaborate. I would be more than happy to accept with more elaboration about the definitions and what the argument is about.

Love=Free Will

someone want to vote?

Pro, please add more definitions.

lol

Please provide definitions, so I can further understand what you mean by, "the education system sucks"

Thank you.

Yea, pro-life kinda messed up. Shoulda added more definitions.

I would define what I mean in my first argument.

I can see where you're coming from. I don't think it's wrong, but I do think that it should have some restrictions.

I agree entirely with you.

I agree with pro 100%.

I wasn't complaining about him, I was just wondering if he was going to respond.