The Instigator
Pro (for)
2 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Even if you don't belive in the mormon church, everyone should have their standards

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/4/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 571 times Debate No: 113498
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)



Some of the standards in the mormon church include:
Don't smoke
Don't drink
Don't do tobacco
Eat meat sparingly
Don't swear
Be modest

You may not be a mormon, but following their standards could be a good idea. These are just some standards. You have 8,000 charecters to respond. Good luck.


Hello. This is a topic that I wish was discussed a little more often. Thank you!

I will be happy to go through each of these.

Don't Smoke:
This one I agree with. The nicotine contained in the cigarettes makes the unhealthy habit addictive. Smoking is known to cause lung cancer, yellow teeth, and can make someone appear older than they actually are. Are there any other reasons besides these that you think we shouldn't smoke?

Don't drink:
I don't completely agree with this standard. Of course, alcohol should not be consumed in large doses to the point when people's speech and actions are affected severely. Small doses, however, are okay as long as no harm is being done.

Don't do tobacco:
Again, the nicotine makes it addictive so I agree with this one as well.

Eat meat sparingly:
From arguments I've seen online, humans are omnivores. They were originally meant to eat plants however their system can digest meat as well. The things people eat (other than humans) should be up to their decision whether we agree with it or not.

Don't swear:
I avoid swearing for the most part. It makes someone seem immature. I don't feel that everyone should follow this, though, as it can express emotions in a different manner than normal words can.

Be modest:
This I agree with for people, however, it's a person's choice to choose how they dress. Everyone's definiton of modesty is different too, so it can be up to someone's opinion.

Again, thank you for covering this topic! Hope to hear your response soon. :)
Debate Round No. 1


By eat meat sparingly, I don't mean don't eat meat, I mean don't eat too much, like alcohol, as you pointed out earlier. Some people eat WAY too much meat, and as a result are unhealthy.
As far as avoiding swearing, there are other wats to express emotion, and frankly, it is immensely bad for you, as well as making it hard for people to take you seriously.
For your be modest rebuttal, I agree.

Thank you for your response.


I've never heard of or seen anyone eat too much meat. Of course, it's definitely possible, but the thought never came to my mind until now because you have mentioned it. I now understand what you mean and agree with that.

How is swearing "immensely bad" for someone? I do agree that there are better ways of expressing emotion and it can come off as immature. I rarely swear, however when I'm mad and lose all "filters", I don't hesitate to and it has the opposite effect than what you said of not being able to be taken seriously. Once I start swearing which I normally wouldn't do, it becomes very apparent that bad stuff is about to happen...

I agree overall that swearing should be avoided in general. Some people have a breaking point like I do. It takes A LOT to get me to my breaking point, but once I'm there it can be much worse than most other people's. It comes out because one has no control anymore because all their emotions are coming out at once. In general, I agree that swearing should be kept to a minimum.
Debate Round No. 2


Sorry I've not been able to get back to you.
In defense of the "it is hard to take you seriously if you swear" arguement, lets say that I got angry at you because of your last aguememt, and started rapidly insultiing you, swearing at you, and calling you names. Would you take me as seriously? Would you still want to talk to me? Would other people viewing this debate still belive in my arguement if they did at first?

Second, swearing is a form of anger venting, and studies show that anger venting actually makes you angrier, more likely to make rash decisions, and more likely to get cardiovascular disease.*

* (just look at the procedure)


Over the Internet, it's harder to portray emotion, so if you started swearing at me you wouldn't be taken as seriously. If I saw your face and heard your voice, however, there would be a much better chance that I would be more affected. They also wouldn't have believed your argument because you would've gone back on your word.

I definitely believe that anger venting makes one angrier, however I've never heard the fact that it makes you more likely to get cardiovascular disease. Well, I learn something new every day! :D
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by 32doni32nido32 3 years ago
Whether it's because of alcohol or not, wouldn't cancer also be considered as natural of a cause as organ failure? I'm not certain of this answer myself; it's not a rhetorical question.
Posted by SHARINGISCARINGg 3 years ago
I agree with Pro fully, except for the "eat meat sparingly." That is ridiculous. And for the alcohol, ONE DROP of alcohol increases your chances of getting cancer. Without alcohol, the world's average life span would increase exceedingly. Most experts say that almost everyone that died of natural causes would live to be about 80-90 years old.
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
But drinking can bring people together and make a good time even better. Let's not tell adults to "Don't drink" let's teach them the problems caused by abuse of alcohol then let them decide.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Leaning 3 years ago
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: This is really more a conversation than a debate. I also don't find it enough that Con is able to point out not all people would want to avoid meat or alcohol. The phrasing in the "everyone should have their standards: is vague enough to not mean everyone should have all of their standards. If Con had challenged this, it would be different. I found both sides arguments roughly the same. The source does seem to apply to the debate. If anyone thinks my vote logic is flawed, message me and let me know, I'll try better next time. If anyone dislikes the score, message me and I'll try to get others to vote on it as well.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.