The Instigator
Jedi4
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Yassine
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

This sweat shop would state: Atheism Supports Public Urination

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 2 votes the winner is...
Yassine
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/18/2015 Category: Music
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,043 times Debate No: 73719
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (2)

 

Jedi4

Pro

Defines

Atheism: The horrible belief *trys not to vomit* that god dont exist or the lack of belief (i know ahtiests are always on about lack of beliefs and sh1t)
Public: In front of all the peoples
Urination: Pissin out your thing.

number one round is for accepting
Yassine

Con

I thank Pro for instigating the rather odd debate, & I accept the challenge.



Resolution:


- Due to the odd structure of the Resolution, I assume the affirmative position (Pro’s) is: Atheism Supports Public Urination.



BOP:


- The burden of proof is on Pro to prove that Atheism does indeed support public urination.



Best of luck.

Debate Round No. 1
Jedi4

Pro

Thanks mohammad.

Argue number one

Atheism says were all animals. We came from the lower animals like fish, earthworms, and those freakly little fishs that get in your pen1s if you pee in water with them in it because they swim up your pee stream *shudder*. Do you see animals going to the potty? Nope they sit out there in public and pee anywhere they want. dont matter who is looking at them or how many they go and go without a care. Atheism wants us to be that they say thats our great grandpa and to respect the elders.


Argue number three

Atheism frequinelty disrespects religion. The children in the public school are drilled day in day out to hate god and jessus and the bible and christianity and the lord and the son and the father and God and the holy of holies.





The children become aduilts and grow to hate religion and jesus so much they have to burn bibles and descirate churches. They even pee on churches. Yup its in public. Ovserve

http://www.thelocal.it...

This athiest was caught doing the wee wee on a famous church. The peoples asked why he would do such a thing his answer?

"“I'm an atheist” What a s1ck f*ck. Its what happens when you become and atheist. This happens so much that churchs need to put signs up tht say no urinating

<a href=http://wp.patheos.com.s3.amazonaws.com...; width="668" height="374" />




Sick. that little heathen calvin (an athiest famois for peeing on everything) pees on the cross
<a href=http://stargazing.com...; />

Id whip his a$$ cheeks.


Argue two

Atheism supports an unhealthy exploration of sexual experiences. It poses no restrictions on sexual sex so the ahtiest think they can do anything. It starts out small like just a kiss on the cheek, then a kiss on the other set of cheeks then its horrible stuff like public sex and then urinating on your girl then urninating on multiple girls. You say it cant happen? wrong withouyt some sexual barriours on place that only religion can give the person eventually gives up on the little boring stuff and goes onto harder and rougher and dirtyer stuff. Eventally atheists will be urinating on children. I predict it to be true in the next 300 years.








Yassine

Con

Yassine forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Jedi4

Pro

Jedi4 forfeited this round.
Yassine

Con

Yassine forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Jedi4

Pro

Jedi4 forfeited this round.
Yassine

Con

I did not wish to continue the debate, for it is worth the time. But, fortunately, I decided otherwise. After all, why miss such an obvious win.

I should also remind the voters that the BOP is on Pro.



Thanks mohammad.


- This is apparently a racist connotation, which should be penalised by the voters.



Argue number one

Atheism says were all animals. We came from the lower animals like fish, earthworms, and those freakly little fishs that get in your pen1s if you pee in water with them in it because they swim up your pee stream *shudder*. Do you see animals going to the potty? Nope they sit out there in public and pee anywhere they want. dont matter who is looking at them or how many they go and go without a care. Atheism wants us to be that they say thats our great grandpa and to respect the elders.


- Atheism is the denial of the existence of deity. There is no correlation between Atheism & Public Urination whatsoever.


- Pro mistakes Atheism for the Theory of Evolution, & these two are not necessarily correlated either.


- Also, regardless if Evolution is true or not, even if humans came from Animals, that doesn’t mean they obey the same laws animals do. To draw an analogy, modern Westerners are descendants of Greeks, Romans, Franks, Germans . . . but they do not necessarily obey the same laws their ancestors did, namely: crucification.



Argue number three

Atheism frequinelty disrespects religion. The children in the public school are drilled day in day out to hate god and jessus and the bible and christianity and the lord and the son and the father and God and the holy of holies.


- This is a red herring fallacy, as it has nothing to do with the resolution.



The children become aduilts and grow to hate religion and jesus so much they have to burn bibles and descirate churches. They even pee on churches. Yup its in public. Ovserve

http://www.thelocal.it...;

This athiest was caught doing the wee wee on a famous church. The peoples asked why he would do such a thing his answer?

"“I'm an atheist” What a s1ck f*ck. Its what happens when you become and atheist. This happens so much that churchs need to put signs up tht say no urinating


- An atheist urinating in public doesn’t imply that atheism calls for public urination. Pro had to prove that all, or at least most atheist publicly urinate to inductively infer his resolution.



Argue two

Atheism supports an unhealthy exploration of sexual experiences. It poses no restrictions on sexual sex so the ahtiest think they can do anything. It starts out small like just a kiss on the cheek, then a kiss on the other set of cheeks then its horrible stuff like public sex and then urinating on your girl then urninating on multiple girls. You say it cant happen? wrong withouyt some sexual barriours on place that only religion can give the person eventually gives up on the little boring stuff and goes onto harder and rougher and dirtyer stuff. Eventally atheists will be urinating on children. I predict it to be true in the next 300 years.


- Again, this is a red herring, as this has nothing to do with atheism calling for public urination.



Conclusion:



- Pro utterly failed in fulfilling the resolution, & use filthy language & racist connotations, unfit for a decent atheist, christian or any man.


=> Vote Con.

Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Yassine 1 year ago
Yassine
- Thank you Espera for your vote. ^_^
Posted by Jedi4 1 year ago
Jedi4
"- This is apparently a racist connotation, which should be penalised by the voters."

Phhhht waht a baby
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by Blade-of-Truth 1 year ago
Blade-of-Truth
Jedi4YassineTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - Tie. Both debaters forfeited two rounds each. I was disappointed to see this as a judge, but understand why and can empathize with Con for the derogatory remarks. However, forfeiting is never acceptable, continuing to debate in the face of adversarial intent is the key challenge of debate. Thus conduct remains tied for the equal forfeits from both sides. Had Con not forfeited, he'd have easily won conduct. S&G - Con. Pro had several spelling and grammatical errors whereas Con had none. Arguments - Con. Pro never presented any substantial arguments. Pro committed alot of fallacies, as well as no rebuttals. On the flip side, Con was able to come back in the last round and destroy each argument presented by Pro with his rebuttals. It was a clear troll effort on Pro's part, and one that wasn't even that good, but rather semi-offensive to both Con and atheists. Since Con was able to rebut his arguments, he wins. Sources - Tie. Neither utilized sources.
Vote Placed by Espera 1 year ago
Espera
Jedi4YassineTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: This is a troll debate started by Jedi4, - as such he made no real points, he presented no real logic, and he was horribly disrespectful. Therefore I have to yield all my points to Yassine who only forfeited one round versus two and made actual points.