Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
4
debates
37.5%
won
Topic
#5150
Islam
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After not so many votes...
It's a tie!
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 500
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
0
1258
rating
367
debates
39.65%
won
Description
Any position that you hold against Islam is welcome and can be criticized. Please list a few (1-3) main topics you disagree with about Islam. The contender should be genuine in their questions. Since Islam is a religion, the assumption here is that God exists, so this is not a debate about (existence) God.
Round 1
Topic: Circumcision is a generally good thing. It's benefits outweighs the risk according to a lot of research. Even if an individual doesn't have consent to the matter, it's still the moral thing to do. For example, someone consents to suicide but society will not allow such a thing. Do you have an argument against Circumcision?
The healthiest countries in the world dont circumcise.
Round 2
Circumcision is practiced in some predominantly Christian countries... Anglosphere countries, the Philippines, the Middle East, South Korea and Oceania have high circumcision rates (Wikipedia)
According to worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/healthiest-countries Anglosphere countries are included in that list like Australia. UK and Israel are also inlcuded. Evidence disapproves that claim: "Healthiest countries dont circumcise". Also, correlation does not equal causation.
Also, correlation does not equal causation.
Causation is correlation.
The only benefits which you think circumcision has are derived from correlations.
Japan is the healthiest country on Earth. Japan doesnt circumcise.
Next.
Round 3
Causation is correlation.
Logical Fallacy
The only benefits which you think circumcision has are derived from correlations.
Not the only benefit (it is a good deed regardless of consequences).
Japan is the healthiest country on Earth. Japan doesnt circumcise.
I already gave a counter-example: Israel. You argue from pragmatism: truth is based on what is successful in practicality.
Japan has longer life expectancy than Israel.
So I am afraid that I win.
Round 4
Japan has longer life expectancy than Israel.
First you said healthiest countries don't do X. Then I gave a counter-example of a country that does do X. Now you moved on to life expectancy. Even taking your logic, South Korea and Japan have the same life expectancy (84). SK has high rates of Circumcision.
South Korea and Japan have the same life expectancy (84). SK has high rates of Circumcision.
Which proves that circumcision is unnecessary pain and people can live just as good without it.
Also, most of the healthiest countries dont circumcise.
But most of the unhealthiest shitholes do, especially muslim shit holes.
Round 5
"If one country does X (let's say circumcision) and another doesn't but both achieve the same goal (i.e healthiest countries) then is X necessary?"
If my argument was that X was for health then X is not necessary. But that wasn't my argument. Also, X can't be a control variable. Two countries don't have all the same factors but just X different.
The last lines, I answer in comments.
Comments dont count in debates, so rejected.
"Two countries don't have all the same factors but just X different"
As I said, on average, uncircumcised countries are healthier, proving that mass circumcision is unnecessary pain caused by islam.
Sure. The same points were repeated in the arguments anyway. I would just like to say to the voters: The contender changed the argument (straw-man): "If one country does X (let's say circumcision) and another doesn't but both achieve the same goal (i.e healthiest countries) then is X necessary?" But my argument was not X is healthy (or necessary for health). My argument was its good because the benefits outweigh the risk.
Comments dont count in debates, so I dont have to answer it.
You don't have to debate in comments. You can answer the comment in your argument. I mistakingly limited the word count so I can't explain all my points in the arguments page.
Sorry, I wont debate in comments.
"Also, most of the healthiest countries dont circumcise.
But most of the unhealthiest shitholes do, especially muslim shit holes."
Sure. But circumcision is not the reason these countries are unhealthy as I explained before. Most unhealthiest countries are in Africa and mostly Christian. You are thinking pragmatically - you believe the truth of ideas comes from success in practicality. Which is not a logical way of thinking.
For the 2nd point: The health benefits are correlated with circumcision. But I never claimed they were the cause of it. One healthy country does X the other ones doesn't do X. Therefore, we can't judge that X is bad based off that.
I can't change the word limit so that's unfortunate
"Causation is correlation"
Korea must have the most advanced education in the world.. this is some truly exceptional equality.
Circumcision