Instigator / Pro
1
1264
rating
356
debates
39.75%
won
Topic
#5140
Spanking children is good for their mental health
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 1 vote and with 6 points ahead, the winner is...
Benjamin
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Rated
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- Two weeks
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
- Minimal rating
- None
Contender / Con
7
1774
rating
98
debates
77.55%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
It teaches them how to be violent and tough.
“We know that spanking is not effective and can be harmful for children’s development and increases the chance of mental health issues."
Research over the last 50 years show us that spanking children is harmful to their mental health.
Round 2
My arguments are facts.
Assuming PRO's R1 argument is correct, he still hasn't shown that becoming violent and tough is good for your mental health.
Round 3
Its a truism.
Do you wanna be tough? No?
Being violent is not an inherently good trait, and it certainly doesn't help you have healthy relationships with the people around you. Your mental health suffers as a result.
.
The hell bound atheist Benjamin wants Christians to go against their Gods word where the inspired word of Jesus as God stated that they are not to spank their children, but to BEAT THEM WITH A ROD instead: "Withhold not correction from the child: for if thou BEATEST him with the rod, he shall not die. Thou shalt BEAT HIM with the rod, and shalt deliver his soul from hell." (Proverbs.23:13-14)
What did we expect from a Bible dumb ass Atheist like Benjamin!
I hope that I don't get assumed for having "pedantic" qualities or "petty nitpicking" qualities for my statements that have been made in the comment section.
If we wanna chat about who yapped more, I think we all would say pro yapped the most in this debate.. and couldn't provide any source for their argument.
In such sense.. pro is asking to be dominated directly in the glory hole.
Most of the rounds lack sources of the argument both opposing sides are making.. and the sources provided are -- in addition poorly distributed..
If the quotation that you have written is from the harvard link provided then what you've stated your own self goes against your own argument in round 1 because you are not stating what the quotation itself states.
You have written: "Research over the last 50 years show us that spanking children is harmful to their mental health."
The quotation as cited in round one states:
"We know that spanking is not effective and can be harmful for children’s development and increases the chance of mental health issues."
The quotation you provided also claims that spanking children can be harmful for children's development.. not "is"-- in simplification.. a matter of "can" is not a matter of "is"... an oversimplification could be "is" is not "can"
Please get better at "seriousness" instead of "yapanese".. because it can be a "dayfucker" for people who know how to read..