The Instigator
vi_spex
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Challeger30
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

ban islam

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 4 votes the winner is...
Challeger30
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/4/2016 Category: Religion
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 230 times Debate No: 94436
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

vi_spex

Pro

muslims that dont follow the koran are not terrorists
Challeger30

Con

The problem with the motion is that people in America have a right to freedom of religion. To pick out one religion and decide it should be banned is blatant discrimination. Furthermore there are millions of practicing Islamics that are very peaceful and do not bother anyone. America is supposed to be the land of the free and the motion presented here is a direct contradiction to freedom.
That being said I have to admit that radical Islamics are by far the most dangerous type of religious fanatics in modern history. There have been polls taken around the world that show their are many millions of radicals in other countries that have a deep hatred of everything that is the west.
Pro has stated that "muslims that dont follow the Koran are not terrorists" but provides no statistics or any type of supporting evidence what so ever. Despite my opponents lack of evidence the motion does seem appealing to many Americans given recent events. Even I have considered that perhaps it would be safer for everyone should Islam be banned. But we have to keep in mind the Muslims have lived in peace here for many years without any incidents to cause concern. It was only after 911 that fears of radicals became common place.

While I am against an outright ban on Islam I will say that America needs to stop any more from entering the country. FBI Director Comey has went before Congress and openly declared that vetting all the refugees is simply not possible. ISIS could very well infiltrate them and come to American soil.

We have to accept the people that are already here but that does not mean we can't stop anymore from entering. This way Islam is not banned and we make it much more difficult for ISIS or any other terrorist group to enter the country.
Debate Round No. 1
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Letsdebate24 4 months ago
Letsdebate24
vi_spexChalleger30Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con made excellent points but would have benefited from proving sources to support the position.
Vote Placed by evanjfarrar 4 months ago
evanjfarrar
vi_spexChalleger30Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con adequately responds to Pro's "argument" by claiming freedom of religion does not allow for the ban of Muslims.
Vote Placed by warren42 4 months ago
warren42
vi_spexChalleger30Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Assuming the debate was supposed to be about a ban in America, Con definitely wins as he/she proved that freedom of religion does not allow this. Pro didn't really make an argument.
Vote Placed by ConserativeDemocrat 4 months ago
ConserativeDemocrat
vi_spexChalleger30Tied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate is a win for Con. They provide strong arguments, including discrimination, and that not all Muslims are evil. He points out that America has the freedom of religion, so you can not prevent people from following said religion. As for Pro, he provides no arguments, only stating that Muslims who don't follow the Koran are not terrorists. This implies that Muslims who do follow the Koran are terrorists, but he doesn't prove this. So Con made good arguments, while Pro makes none.