Debate Rounds (2)
The number one argument I hear from people who want to ban Muslims from entering the country is that they are terrorists. However, the Muslim population is 23% of the entire population of the world. So based on a recent study, only about 106,000 Muslims belong to extremist organizations. That means that only about .006625% of the Muslim population is "extremist". Given this number, the odds are extremely low of a Muslim extremist entering the country. Therefore, I do not believe that Muslims should be banned outright from the country. There may need to be work done on background checks, but to ban them entirely is ridiculous.
I eagerly await my opponent's response.
a muslims follows the koran
no arguments can exist for islam
Islam- the religious faith of Muslims, based on the words and religious system founded by the prophet Muhammad and taught by the Koran, the basic principle of which is absolute submission to a unique and personal god, Allah.
Muslim- of or relating to the religion, law, or civilization of Islam.
Koran-the sacred text of Islam, divided into 114 chapters, or suras: revered as the word of God, dictated to Muhammad by the archangel Gabriel, and accepted as the foundation of Islamic law, religion, culture, and politics.
Given these three definitions, allow me to go through my opponent's lines one by one.
"a muslims follows the koran"
This statement is true. A Muslim is part of the faith that follows the Koran.
"no arguments can exist for islam"
Based on the previous statement, my opponent seems to believe that if one follows the Koran, they are not radicalists. However, given that a Muslim is a follower of the religion of Islam, it is safe to say that Islam has the same statistic of radicalists as I pointed out in my first argument.
Finally, given that I have proved that Islam is the same as Muslims, I would like to jump back to my first statement, which I stated, " That means that only about .006625% of the Muslim population is "extremist". Given this number, the odds are extremely low of a Muslim extremist entering the country. Therefore, I do not believe that Muslims should be banned outright from the country. There may need to be work done on background checks, but to ban them entirely is ridiculous."
To which my opponent stated, "this is true," and then asserted that Muslims and Islam are two separate entities. However, since a Muslim is a person of the Islamic faith, my point still stands.
I'd like to thank my opponent for the debate and I look forward to the results.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by extian 4 months ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were just vague, confusing statements that lacked proper punctuation and grammar. Pro did not quote sources and really didn't make any effort to defend the assertions. Con was articulate and respectful and did his best to deal with Pro's assertions. Con also provided sources for his statistics. On the whole, Con successfully defeated the resolution.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.