Instigator / Pro
2
1524
rating
53
debates
75.47%
won
Topic
#4654

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
2
2

After 2 votes and with the same amount of points on both sides...

It's a tie!
Judges
RationalMadman's avatar
RationalMadman
574 debates / 861 votes
Voted
Best.Korea's avatar
Best.Korea
357 debates / 85 votes
Voted
Sir.Lancelot's avatar
Sir.Lancelot
182 debates / 79 votes
No vote
DavidAZ's avatar
DavidAZ
8 debates / 34 votes
No vote
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Six months
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Judges
Contender / Con
2
1500
rating
3
debates
33.33%
won
Description

Resolution: Prophet (SAW) from Islamic Religion was a Pedophile.

Pro: Prophet (SAW) from Islamic Religion was a Pedophile

Con: Prophet (SAW) from Islamic Religion was not a Pedophile.

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.

--

Rules:
1. Burden of proof is shared.

-->
@tigerlord

If I directly mentioned you in that comment, it was made for you.

-->
@Bella3sp

nope for me its not, so tell me whom you are reffering?

-->
@tigerlord

It's almost as if it was clear?

If i'm going in partly blindfolded, and ignored, no, I don't want another debate at all.

-->
@Bella3sp

"I didn't continue the debate because I was busy, and just wasn't wanting to put effort into something a self-centered cocky bastard was telling me.

I spent practically hours arguing with him, behind the scenes, for absolutely nothing. "

Whom you are referring this to?
and this wylted seems another brotherD.
If you want to debate let's go.

-->
@WyIted

You think child porn should be legal, but being sexual with children should be banned?

Muslim countries have the opposite.

They ban all porn, even adult porn, and allow child marriages.

Now, I am not really changing my vote, because tie was agreed to and I will keep it a tie even if someone else votes differently.

Note I also debated not only the best debater on the site but the most highly rated one to give the argument the best chance of failing. I think Mikal ended up letting bluesteel do all the work but i did not do the debate in such a way as to be maximally persuasive by choosing weak opponents

Those are in reverse order and advocate for a society that is safer for children. It's also a devil's advocate position

**Wasted Resources**

The FBI is experiencing some severe cuts on their budget which is actually getting in the way of a lot of their counterterrorism work as well as their pursuit of real criminals.[9] It's really hard to get ahold of exactly how the FBI spends their money but suffice it to say that they spent countless millions in pursuit of lonely fat dudes spanking their monkey to little girls. They spend countless millions pursuing people that are in fact causing no harm to annybody. All these people are doing is engaging in some voyuerism and some fantasy. They aren't at risk of raping anybody or engaging in sex with a kid. If the FBI could just redirect this countless millions away from lonely fat guys and redirect it towards counter terrorism or some other vital operation that actually saves lives.

**Conclusion**

Legalizing child porn not only saves children from being raped it actually could prevent another 9/11 when you consider the FBI focusing on more important counter terrorism measures. Legalizing child porn goes a long way towards protecting our freedom of speech and goes even further in preventing disproportionate prison sentences. There is no reason that some dude spanking his monkey to child porn should get a longer prison sentence than somebody raping a child. There is no reason to arrest some 17 year old kid for distributing child porn because he sent a penis picture to his girl friend.

Vote for freedom of speech. Vote to reduce the victimization of children. Vote to counter terrorism. Vote for child porn. Vote pro.

sources

[1] [http://www.springer.com...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://www.springer.com/about+springer/media/springer+select?SGWID=0-11001-6-1042321-0)

[2] [http://www.theaustralian.com.au...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://www.theaustralian.com.au/news/latest-news/study-finds-no-link-between-child-porn-and-sex-abuse/story-fn3dxity-1225749645592?nk=51605fef25f5c8d9b3d397864647e19e)

[3] [http://online.wsj.com...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://online.wsj.com/articles/SB122471925786760689)

[4] [http://www.examiner.com...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://www.examiner.com/article/child-sex-offenders-short-sentencing-early-release-will-re-offend)

[5] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, The Globalization of Crime: A Transnational Organized Crime Threat Assessment 214 (2010); Letter from David Debold, Chair and Eric A. Tirschwell, Vice Chair, Practitioners Advisory Group, to Honorable Patti B. Saris, Chair, United States Sentencing Commission 8 (February 13, 2012), available at [http://www.ussc.gov...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://www.ussc.gov/Legislative_and_Public_Affairs/Public_Hearings_and_Meetings/20120215)- 16/Testimony_15_PAG.pdf.

[6] [http://famm.org...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://famm.org/affected-families/child-pornography-sentences/)

[7] [http://en.wikipedia.org...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miller_v._California)

[8] [http://abcnews.go.com...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/LegalCenter/story?id=433956&page=3)

[9] [http://www.washingtonpost.com...](https://web.archive.org/web/20141106070625/http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/national-security/new-fbi-director-james-b-comey-stunned-by-impact-of-sequestration-on-agents-in-the-field/2013/09/27/0af002d8-2791-11e3-b75d-5b7f66349852_story.html)

- **A high-school boy over age 18 who engages in “sexting” photos of his naked, underage girlfriend to others via his cell phone (child pornography production and distribution)**

- **An 18 year-old high school senior who has consensual sex with his 14 year-old freshman girlfriend (this is sometimes defined as a rape, based on their age difference)**

- **A 22 year-old man who makes a home video of consensual sex with his 17 year-old girlfriend and downloads it to his computer, with his girlfriend’s knowledge and with no intent to share the video with others (child pornography production)[6]**

A 16 year old girl sexting photos to her boyfriend can recieve a really lengthy prison sentence. Under my plan these types of miscarriages of justice would never ever happen. As long as child pornography laws are on the books these are the types of things that will continue to happen.

**'Congress shall make no law . . . abridging the freedom of speech."**

A. This is also a freedom of speech issue. Congress isn't allowed to make any laws restricting the freedom of speech, neither is any other branch of the government. The judicial branch of the government has pretty much ruled that anything the general public views as obscene can be restricted.[7]

The whole point of the first amendmant is to protect material thaat is viewed as obscene by the majority of the population. If the majority of people and the government agreed with the material to start with the first amendmant wouldn't even be neccesary.

"If the First Amendment means anything," Justice Thurgood Marshall said in the 1969 majority decision, "it means that a State has no business telling a man, sitting alone in his own house, what books he may read or what films he may watch."[8]

I just wish Thurgood Marshall would've added something about child porn at the end of that to make my case easier.

If we're going to take freedom of speech serious we need to protect it in the instances where the material offends us the most. The things that offend us most should be the first things we stand up to defend. The battle for our freedom of speech starts and ends with child porn If we fight and win on this front than we win the freedom of speech battle on every front.

Legalizing child porn saves a bunch of kids from being sexually abused but even if it didn't. Even if it saved zero and was null in that area than it would still be worth fighting for based on freedom of speech principals.

**JUSTICE**

**A.** A 2010 study carried out by Milton Diamond and his team at the University of Hawaii and published in the archives of sexual behavior show a sharp decline in child sex abuse since 1989 whn access to child pornography becam easier in Canada, Croatia, Denmark, Germany, Finland, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Sweden, USA. This trend has also been seen in Denmark and Japan.[1]

The fact is that easier access to child porn will and already has significantly lowered the sexual abuse of children. As much as child pornography sucks it exists. It always has existed in one form or another and it always will. We can't eliminate it, but what we can do is use it in a way that helps at risk offendors get their rocks off in the privacy of their own home as opposed to going out and seeking children to harm.

Just to make this clear I'm not saying let's have a kid take one for the team so the rates of sexual abue go down. The F.B.I. already has the largest database of child porn on the planet. making this available to freely view for the public (discretion used to disguise the faces of known victims), would do a lot to curb actualy harm the underground child porn industry saving countless children. When you take in account that this being publicly viewable will help to solve some cold cases by pervs just by happenstance running into an image of somebody they know. The upside to making this database public could be incredible.

**B.** Contrary to popular bellief viewing or posessing child porn doesn't make you anymore likely to rape a child than anybody else.[2]Yet the people actually viewing child porn often times recieve tougher sentences than those who actually abuse children. People caught posessing child porn on average recieve 7 years in prison. [3] Compare this 7 years with the average of 4 years that people who actually sexually abuse children get. [4]

A full legalization of child porn like the one I advocate for would reverse this injustice. Under what I'm proposing if you rape a kid, you get a longer prison sentence than if you happen to come across some child porn on the internet but would not otherwise ever actually harm a child.

My opponents might argue that watching child porn actually helps support the child porn industry and keep it alive. However this is completely untrue.[5] It appears that people don't create child porn for commercial purposes but instead to document their crimes. Plus with me advocating for the FBI to make their database available to the public it actually offsets the vast, vast minority of child porn that may be for commercial reasons if that even exists.

**C.** As long as these child porn laws exist there will be law makers and courts expanding and interpreting these laws in whatever way they feel like to legislate there own morality and put innocent people in prison. Here is a list of things that you can do as a result of child porn laws that can land you in prison sometimes up to 20 years or more.

"

Thank you Mikal and Bluesteel for being willing to debate this incredibly important topic.

I want to take this opportunity to address the voters before I launch into my arguments. I understand I'm arguing against the status quo, but I think the question voters need to ask themselves is; Will legalizing child porn save even 1 child from being sexually abused? If what I'm proposing saves just 1 child from losing their innocence, I'd say it's worth legalizing. When you factor in the life saving implications as well as the increased freedom and the savings in federal spending, you can see legalizing child porn is the lesser of 2 evils.

the pedo stuff I defended

1. pedophilia should be legal. it was advocating for the FBI to open it's child porn database. the argument was that it would kill the child porn market and help identify previously unidentified victims.

2. I think I did a debate where I advocated for pedophiles to be persecuted less that way they could more easily come forward for help before they harmed others

These were positions that were in defense of children. I have an argument I presented in my obsidian. I will copy and paste it next.

there is a difference between defending the stuff as devils advocate and actually believing it is okay. There is a certain ethical responsability to assume once we know somebody legitimately believes the stuff is okay though. They should have the freedom to advocate their position but the ethical responsibility falls on us not the person with the extreme belief. Our ethical responsibility is to try and help those individuals.

You can't seriously believe that debating an extreme position is the same as believing it and that the responsibility of the community should be the same for addressing each issue

You deefende chikdporn here and literal pedo stuff on DDO.

You're literally nobody to be standing on a high horse. It's all fun until you say it isn't right?

I don't need to stress definitions, judges witnessed (or would have) in the case I laid them out in the very beginning.

There is no need to continue debating definitions, when in reality, I succeeded on my part of the definitions. Judges know exactly (or would have) the definitions, and they go off of them. The difference is none when my opponent chooses to either ignore them, or not contend them properly. I pushed my defintions as much as needed.

I already explained my reason, and being honest, I went into this partly blindfolded. Keep in mind, I recommended none of these judges at all. The only special case was DavidAZ when the other possible judge decided quit the website, but we accepted him at late timing.

(And just in case it wasn't known, most judges picked here either voted for him or voted for a tie on his previous debate similarly.. It was clear how he tried weighing it against me).

No topic off the table until me angry caveman hoohaaa

I love seeing you this angry, you deserve every bit of it.

So you can relish in the anger, sadness, discomfort and whatever else of every single person you get riled up and it's wrong when you sob.

Meanwhile real terror is indeed hitting innocent Muslim girls a young as 9 in Gaza and you say wooppoe bombs away.

Fuck. Off. You're not some fucking hero at all dude.

How the fuck is trolling as disabled the same thing as fucking children?

How even if it is wrong to troll that way, make it okay to fuck children?

Fuxk you you evil piece of shit. I told you about one evil option and one non evil thing you can do and you are like "I will take the evil option" .

It tells me everything I need to know about you

Bo topic should be off the table you fucking moron. I know you take a stance against jokes which is retarded but there comes a time when you actually see somebody who believes fucking children is okay and then maybe at that point you take a step back and say . "Hold on can I change this guy's mind and maybe save a child"

You can compare the legitimate belief that pedophilia is okay with people saying something edgy but it's stupid to make the comparison.

When authorities try to ban child marriage by setting a minimum age. The ultra religious in Pakistan reject all attempts to set a minimum age. Does con sound like he may be a fundamentalist.

https://www.dw.com/en/why-underage-marriages-are-still-prevalent-in-pakistan/a-63860202

So you are allowed to debate all wild shit, be a scumbag troll who relishes in the rage and agony you cause others and I'm meant to to anything but laugh at you getting worked up about words on a screen?

I care about things too, you ridicule the left for doing so saying we even hate others for it.

Drop the heroic sob story, you aren't here saving Muslim girls from anything, you're just worked up exactly the way you enjoy seeing those you troll get worked up. Taste your own medicine you hypocritical vermin.

Why not tell us how you're gay and disabled and support eugenics or did that get real old real fast?

He is from Pakistan where the latest statistics. Show that 20% of girls marry before 18. Child brides are a major problem in the region. We have somebody from that region where child fucking is so common who comes on this site to defend fucking children.

He could very well find himself in a situation where he is pressured to marry a child bride or where he chooses to and we have the opportunity to intervene to show him how wrong it is.

It's not okay and we are not debating a theory here for fun.

Muhhamed is just a man. He isn't a God in their religion so when con says that it is okay for muhhamed to fuck 9 year olds he is also claiming it is okay for him to do it.

We have pro who defined things in such a way to cause con to lose the debate. We have a voting section where people can actually point t out how morally reprehensible it is but instead what happens is.

"Haha wylted hates pedophiles let me Pwn him by tying the debate"

It's a serious issue. I am not saying it is wrong for him to even make that stance in a debate but in his mind pedophilia is okay. He is a dealer to children and instead of using the vote to maybe get him to question the morality of the whole thing, the voting section instead is used to Pwn me.

Pro also legitimately won against the guy as well so there is that

Why are you laughing. This isn't some edge lord debate. Con legitimately believes it is okay for grown men to fuck 9 year olds and you support him

Lmao

My opinion is yes and I think for ethical reasons. I may do a longer post on why later.

I think you should atleast consider what I say before deciding. And not just instinctively tie it because you don't like me.

-->
@WyIted

Should I ignore the agreed tie?

-->
@Barney

Please unban sir lancelot for a 2 week period so this debate actually has somebody who weighs arguments from both sides

-->
@Bella3sp

You won your fault was in accepting defeat and also not stressing that he agreed to your definitions when accepting th debate.

-->
@tigerlord

You are sick . I would see defending muhhamed if you actually used some sort of stupid logic to convince yourself he was fucking an adult but instead you admit that he fucked a 9 year old and decided that since she was used as a child soldier that it is okay for the most obvious false prophet in history to fuck her. I read the whole thing

I am by no means calling those definitions accurate but that's what con agreed to

Definitions provided by pro

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

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

-->
@WyIted

Can you show me where Pro cuts through the bs and proves that he's a pedophile as opposed to a hebophile? I need to find the exact point where Pro addresses the puberty point even though we all know at barely turning 9 she's not at all an adult.

I don't if I would use the term "gaslight". It's not as if I was completely unaware.

I didn't continue the debate because I was busy, and just wasn't wanting to put effort into something a self-centered cocky bastard was telling me.

I spent practically hours arguing with him, behind the scenes, for absolutely nothing.

Con, one hundred percent lost this, in my eyes. He admitted to my points, and nothing changed. Hence in my rounds, I discussed that cons arrogance was uncalled for completely. Voting for him once doesn't make it the same. Who cares if he won the last debate he was in, do I look like Sir.Lancelot?

Appreciate it, but to be honest, I don't have to take a physical win on this website. Either I know I truly lost, or I truly won.

-->
@WyIted

listen to the Haram concept known as music and chill out:

https://youtu.be/TyW4R-Yc3Aw?t=160

Wylted,
I can see a frustrating mind that cannot think straight. Probably you did not read the debate at all that is why saying all nonsense.

Con doesn't deny that muhhamed fucked a 9 year old he instead defends fucking 9 year olds. It takes a sick fuck to vote for that especially after con objectively lost

Con objectively lost this but I guess people are really passionate about defending pedophilia and will overlook it

-->
@Barney

Con literally tried to redefine accepted terms to make it so muhhamed was not a pedophile. He even tried to redefine adult to mean 9 year olds.

I am reporting koreas vote so he has a second chance to get this right. We don't have to accept a tie just because con gaslight pro into thinking they lost. Also korea did not weigh both sides of the debate so I think it technically qualifies as an invalid vote

Let's not forget that cons description of adult is different than what he agreed to based on the description of th debate where adult is qualified as a FULLLY matured adult.

-->
@Best.Korea

You don't have to respect their decision to tie, particularly since con doesn't make an argument until round 3 and when he does make an argument the argument is basically that a 9 year old qualifies as an adult so it is okay for a grown man to rape her. I would ask barney to remove your vote so you can recast it and let con know how morally reprehensible raping children is

Rm you should vote on this anyway. Con admits that muhhamed fucked a 9 year old and Is merely stating that maybe the 9 year old reached puberty and that you can be an adult at 9.

So con basically admits that Muhhamed is a pedophile in the debate. It's a forfeit on cons part

-->
@Best.Korea
@tigerlord

Best.Korea,

As is explicitly shown with "PaperTiger's" presence within this esteemed Religion Forum and his lacking debate skills, and within this comment section, it is him that should learn out to just "GIVE UP" with his barbaric faith of Islam, that he can no more defend than 6 month old baby can! The problem with Paper Tiger is the FACT that he doesn't have enough sense to realize in just how embarrassing he truly is by swallowing the ungodly primitive "camel-humping faith" of Islam!

Papertiger precludes that it is okay for stinky sweaty Muslim men to marry innocent young girls of 9 YEARS OLD, but fails to answer a simple question from me if he would allow a Muslim man 4-5 times his beloved daughters age to marry her, to be able to climb on top of her to SCREW HER LITTLE VAGINA IN PAIN, and her mouth and ass as well! This lack of an answer by him precludes that Paptertiger is sickened by his own faith of Islam in this respect!!!!!

Jesus and I dare Papertiger to show up again upon this Religion Forum, where we will take further needed action again upon his stinking Muslim faith, praise!

.

-->
@Best.Korea

.
Best.Korea

ANOTHER ONE OF YOUR INSIPID UNGODLY QUOTES: "Well, maybe its time to give up, since you cant fix us."

BLASPHEME! Jesus has told TRUE Christians like me to convert heathens like YOU to Christianity, therefore if you can't accept my serial killer Jesus, especially when He brutally murderedof innocent zytotes, fetus' and babies, , then that is your problem, understood? Remember, when you start smelling "sulfur," then Jesus as God is about to take your life from you where you will spend eternity in the sulfur lakes of HELL! Praise Jesus' revenge!

.

-->
@Mr.BrotherD.Thomas

Well, maybe its time to give up, since you cant fix us.

-->
@Best.Korea

.
Best.Korea,

YOUR BIBLE STUPID QUOTE AGAIN: "You have probably said those same things 500 times by now. I have never seen anyone repeat the same for so many times and not get bored."

I wouldn't have to state that proposition all the time if YOU and others weren't so God Damned Bible STUPID, get it? Huh?

Now, just get back to your true MO of always being so Bible ignorant, that it must be really BORING for you!

NEXT?

.