I will debate that it is guilty until proven innocent
I will debate that it is guilty until proven innocent
So would I. It may be hard to find anyone in America who believes in innocent until guilty… could we modify the topic a bit?
An eye-opening truth if i ever saw one, although I might go as far as to suggest the whole world - perhaps it is intrinsically human.
I’m not into arguing/debating, too much… But if we could drastically change the topic to be debated- I will gladly ‘debate’ a christian, one that believes the bible contains a historically accurate representation of actual events, if there are any of those fools (no offence, I genuinely believe people like that to be fools) on here.
Or I would be up for debating, more-or-less, anything to do with religion- it does more harm than good, for example.
I don’t have much experience of ‘debating’, but I’ll have a go.
If anyone else volunteers for the Christian side, they’re undoubtedly more qualified than I and I’ll gladly yield. I’m a Christian and a go for debate, BUT my personal views, that there are a number of inaccuracies in the Bible and that the god of the New Testament is not omnipotent in this world, may be too liberal for this particular challenge, as I gather that my would-be worthy opponent is only interested in challenging naive fools and religious simpletons.
I will debate that there will be no debate.
No debate at all on any topic?
DEBATE ME, PLEASE!!
Mel, will you, PLEASE, debate me?
Choose another topic, if you have to (although religion is my favourite subject), just DEBATE ME!!
Thank you, I’d love to. I’m not a formidable opponent, but I enjoy the process. Even when I end up annihilated and humiliated, I learn something from that failure.
Specifics: I’m game for almost any “religion” topic so long as I have enough room to honestly present FOR my liberal beliefs (similar to Unitarian). What would be some religious topics of interest to you?
Time: I’ve never engaged in a formal computer debate before (unless you count email to email), so I’m not familiar with the different protocols. I’d have to have segmented, flexible time, almost like e-mail debates. I can’t promise being available to sit at the computer at any particular time, nor for any particular length of time, so I guess I’d have to ask for an almost email-like segmented, extended debate with limits on response time (respond to opponent within x hours??). Would something like that work for you?
Looking forward to it, thanks again for the offer.
NOTE: I’m really not a good debater, so place our debate at the bottom of your debate hierarchy, if you get offers from other opponents. Patience is one of my strengths – more time to prepare. 
Also, consider that my required type of segmented response, as with segmented game playing moves, allows you to engage in other debates concurrently.
Great! Thankyou.
Im not much of a ‘debater’, either.
Your idea of taking our time to respond suits me down to the ground, so to speak.
You identify yourself as a ‘‘christian’’, but then seem to exclude yourself from the category of ‘‘naive fools and religious simpletons’’ (please dont be offended)???
Could you explain this to me, please?
What makes a person a ‘‘christian’’?
What makes YOU a ‘‘christian’’?
(I haven’t got much experience of debating, but i believe this is going to be ‘fun’!!)
I’ll gladly answer those questions, once we ascertain they will not be the topic of debate 
. You’ve subtly suggested a couple of good topics already. Why don’t you make a short list of suggested topics, then I’ll edit them and pass them back to you, and we’ll go back and forth until we’ve settled on one? Or is there a better way?
Question: Since we’ll have time for responses, would you be OK if I used my husband samm (on this forum) as a resource/adviser? Conversely, I’d freely allow you consultation with anyone you might choose.
I like to trust you with the details (translate: scut work), if that’s OK, like judges or whatever – I’m pretty easy as long as we’re mutually agreed on the topic and protocol of responding. rebecca
That all sounds fine. I’ll think on that “list” tonight, and show you what I have (probably and hopefully) tomorrow.
Thanks. Dan
Debate me on christianity. Why will the question “why is a person a christian?” not be part of our debate? This is a philosophy forum, for your own good, if you are a ‘devout’ christian, and are intelligent (an intelligent christian???) don’t debate me on christianity, go on another forum; there are plenty of “christian forums”!!! Christianity is RETARDED; there is no such thing, in this reality, as a “clever” christian!!! I am, as a friend of mine worded it, a “real philosopher” (I’m still not getting it), if you debate me on this I WILL win.
PS: I’m pretty clever you know; and I think I have worked out who you are… (Your real name, if I’m right, begins with J). Debate me on christianity if you want, and dare- but I’ll probably just show you why its a load of superstitious horse-shit, so to speak.
OK, now what is the specific proposition or question we might be debating? I’ll need something a little more specific than Christianity is superstitious horse poop and/or I am a naive fool (because I am a Christian?), or all Christians are superstitious fools. I don’t mind answering any of your questions, I just want to be sure that they are not directly part of the debate, since if they are, I might want to answer them during the debate.
What’s your decision about allowing samm as my counsel (and you with the right to consult anyone of your choosing at any time – no need to inform me about it)?
No J’s in my name. Why would you think that I am other than rebecca, wife of samm, 60 year old woman and fairly new to this forum where I use the name melonkali? There’s nothing secret or notorious about me.
Win or lose, I hope we enjoy a good, lively debate and exit shaking hands as we did when we entered “the ring”. I hope we both come out just a little bit more respectful of and knowledgeable about the other’s position. rebecca 
This is the debate! its fine for you to ‘‘consult’’ whoever you like; have a bible at hand, and the pope on speed dial, if you like (this is, after all, just anonymous crap, on some meaningless message board on the internet- dont worry about it!).
christianity is an ancient mythology, dreamed up by a rather primitive civilisation- not much more than a ‘‘tribe of savages’’, really!
I dont believe that any christian can be exepted from the category of ‘‘naive fools’’- can you explain me how they can?
about me thinking you may have been somebody i know: just forget it; I MIGHT have been wrong (it happens often enough, believe me!)
What makes a person a ‘‘christian’’?
lets debate!!!
I posted from my partners account (Faye-23), accidently; sorry for any confusion this may have caused.
OK, let’s go. As soon as I can get back to my own computer (obviously typing from samm’s right now), after samm digs a not-too-bright clumsy little kitten out of the ceiling above it, or sometime today or tonight (real life hassles), I’ll lead off with an argument or two concerning the origins of Christianity as more than man-invented superstition.
Re: citations in our debate: I’d appreciate the freedom, which would apply to you as well, to occasionally give an informal citation vs. digging through stacks of old books, BUT I’ll always make sure that I can access and formally cite any factual claim I make, in case there is disagreement about the facts, and I’d expect the same from you. Deal?
Re: Faye 23, I hadn’t noticed that. I have a grown daughter named Faye. Please tell me you’re not in Tennessee.
Back at you later today or tonight, depending on Sunday hassles; the day is NOT beginning well.
Hey, maybe I’ll dress samm up like the consulieri (Robert Duvall) in The Godfather 
Don’t tell him I said that. 
rebecca