god is a unicorn
Debate Rounds (3)
The supporting side - that is the side Affirmative must do the Two following things to prove that god is an unicorn. Otherwise, since there is not enough solid evidence (or arguments) we can not conclude for certainly that god is a unicorn. And hence the argument shall not stand.
Firstly, the supporting side must give arguments and evidence to why god is a unicorn
Secondly, the supporting side must define why god cannot be any other creature (know or unknown to man)
If the supporting side failed to do one of the two above requirements, we can no longer conclude that god is Solely a unicorn.
Thus the argument shall not stand.
(P.S. sorry for the bad english @@ )
you are con, you prove why god is not a unicorn.. or you are not con
Well in common debate speeches ,the supporting side (host side) have the responsibility to prove its statement while the opposition (that is me) will be hell-bent in providing counter arguments and rebuttals :P
But since this is not the case, may i have the priviledge to inquire :
How do you gain such knowledge as God is a Unicorn ?
Thank you for your response, however, it may seem that your arguments lack enough evidence.
I would like to propose my rebuttal according to the For's side logics (who believes one's personal believe can act as evidence/truth)
1) If a believe alone can act as "truth", more believers means more "truth"
2) There are far more believe as God is not a unicorn than God is a unicorn
To conclude, as the supporting side lacks sufficient evidence & the number of believes that "God is not a unicorn" brings a greater "truth"
Therfore, this motion shall not stand
No votes have been placed for this debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate