Instigator / Pro
1
1524
rating
53
debates
75.47%
won
Topic
#4644

Prophet (SAW) from Islamic Religion was a Pedophile.

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
1
0

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

Bella3sp
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
One month
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
0
1500
rating
5
debates
50.0%
won
Description

Resolution: Prophet (SAW) from Islamic Religion was a Pedophilia or Hebephilia.

Pro: Prophet (SAW) from Islamic Religion was a Pedophilia or Hebephilia.
Con: Prophet (SAW) from Islamic Religion was not a Pedophilia or Hebephilia.

Willing to change definitions if asked. Otherwise, these are the current set definitions.

Pedophile: a person who is sexually attracted to children.
https://languages.oup.com/google-dictionary-en/

Child groomer: Grooming is when someone builds a relationship, trust and emotional connection with a child or young person so they can manipulate, exploit and abuse them.
https://www.nspcc.org.uk/what-is-child-abuse/types-of-abuse/grooming/

Child: A child is a human being who is not yet an adult.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/child

Adult: An adult is a mature, fully developed person.
https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/adult

Any other definitions should be stated in the beginning of round one (unless introduced later on), other than that, any other words should be used in there primary context.

--

I'm also willing to recreate this debate for judges, if needed.

Rules:
1. Only one person can accept this debate, tigerlord. Unless specifically mentioned in the comments of a change, or he declines. Either way.
2. Burden is shared.
3. Anyone who accepts besides tigerlord (unless stated otherwise in comments) results in an automatic concession.

Okay, lets make it more simple.

Sexual attraction is included in person.

Person is not included in sexual attraction.

However, the topic suggests that person is included in sexual attraction.

-->
@Best.Korea

I get it, lol. I am adding a different definition, where the definition states "a person who is attracted .." Or I'll just find another way to reword the resolution.

I just assumed with tigerlord, he wasn't going to nitpick at that.

Person also includes things like feeling desire to eat.

Feeling desire to eat is not included in a sexual attraction.

Feeling desire to eat is included in person.

Person is not included in sexual attraction.

Ok, I will do it.

Person can have sexual attraction.

Person can have an arm.

Arm is not a person.

Sexual attraction is not a person.

I tried my best.

-->
@RationalMadman

On the other hand, you might wanna explain it to bella... on why person cannot be a sexual attraction.

-->
@tigerlord

I changed max character limit.
Private message me to discuss judges.

-->
@RationalMadman

Thats good. Well, the bait was a bit obvious. I mean, no sane person would take that bait.

-->
@RationalMadman

Thank you.. A bit passive aggressive, but its whatever.

I'm sure you can look up the definition of pedophilia on your own.

I'm also not sure if you didn't read all what I said, as I just said, I might change it. I get what your saying.

-->
@Best.Korea

I won't take the bait to explain such an obvious thing.

-->
@Bella3sp

Increase voting period to 6 months, and increase max words to 30000.
It would be good if you put judges as well.
Inform me names as well.

I have an attraction. I am an attraction. Whats the difference, really?

-->
@Bella3sp

I am not sure if it's a fluency issue or dyslexia or something but let me make this clearer to you:

An individual can HAVE Xphilia or Yphilia or BE an Xphille or Yphile.

How can Muhammad have BEEN a philia?

This debate is a truism. Aisha was pubescent. Prophet had interest in her. Whats there to argue? That it wasnt real interest? Oh suck my tiny balls.

-->
@RationalMadman

In this case, yes. I was going to mention pedophile, but the definition worked in this case.

I may find a new definition for pedophile in specific, if it's all that.

You are saying a person is a philia?

-->
@RationalMadman

I wasn't expecting to argue over the two being that I already set definitions.

'phile' and 'philia' are not the same word ending btw

-->
@tigerlord

Accept this debate please.