Each of the Ten Commandments is either unnecessary or incomplete.

Arguing the conditions of the debate. .. gotta love it. "I agreed to no such strawman debate. "Actually, you did. Perhaps there was a misunderstanding in the way I said you have to prove one of them is "always good" or "infallible", but that is indeed your burden of proof in this debate. You must prove one of the commandments is complete and necessary (which is what I meant by "infallible") for morally guiding the lives of everyone (not just most people, which is what I meant by "always good"). This is what was clearly articulated in the first round of the debate. "Each of the commandments are complete. Their current incarnation is the finished, final draft. "Yes, I understand that they are the final drafts, but you're using a different definition of "complete" than I posed in the instigation. Complete, for the purposes of this debate's proposition, is "not lacking anything important". I'm not going to argue semantics by saying "Each of the ten commandments is incomplete because it fails to include the other nine" so I expect you to respectfully do the same. "To clear up any further confusion, your definition of moral is illiterate. "Thanks, but it's the only definition relevant to the debate, since it's the one I used in the instigation. "However, I will gladly use your definition of moral. "Good, because you already did by accepting this debate. Refutations5. Honor thy abusers"If parents cease to act honorably, then child is allowed to seek help. "In that case, then the commandment is lacking something important (incomplete). It should read "Honor thy mother and father, unless they cease to act honorably".6. Thou shall be a pacifist wimp"Actually it does say, thou shall not murder. "The Hebrew word (ratsach) and the Greek Word (phonenō) which are used in the Sixth Commandment both clearly mean "murder. ""[1]"Completely irrelevant. If you look at he proposition again (the one you agreed to debate), you will see that it says "The Ten Commandments (as listed in the King James' Version of the Bible) [. .. ]" We are not debating any other texts but the ones I provided.7. Thou shall be forced to sex only your arranged marriage spouse "Not really. Arranged marriage has nothing to do with adultery. Adultery is sex outside of marriage. Whether a woman is enslaved into an arranged marriage has no bearing on adulterous behavior. "Yes, I know that, Con. My hypothetical scenario depicts the problem this commandments faces when met with an arranged marriage. That is, the two people involved (who could very well be strangers) can only have sex with each other and not whoever they may actually love.8. Thou shall not be a klepto"That's not the definition of stealing. That's reclamation. "Yes, and that's not a rectangle; it's a square. In many cases, reclamation can also be stealing. And my opponent still has not addressed the starving family scenario.9. Thou shall not lie"I find this scenario silly. "You are free to do so, but it is still a very real scenario. In fact, just the other day, one of my friends was struck in the side of the face after leaving work by another co-worker. When the police arrived, everyone was claiming to have seen nothing. Would it have been morally wrong for me to lie and say that I saw it (when I actually didn't) so that justice could be served to the attacker?10. Thou shall not think what you wantMy opponent doesn't address this one. Arguments extended. ConclusionMy opponent has failed to explain why just one of these commandments is complete and necessary for morally guiding the lives of everyone (as well as failing to understand the conditions of the debate). He, in no way, has explained why any of my revised versions of the commandments is not better than the real versions.