Sex

"[It] goes in, [it] goes out... you can't explain that." - Bill O'Reilly on the enigma of sexPre-Argument Remarks:Pro writes "Well, my opponent is relating being rude and sex in ways that are not compatible. I'm afraid it is he who complains with his "petty jibes"."See? My opponent is trying to slander my good name! It is clear he has no valid counters to my arguments, so he has to resort to pathetic ad hominem.Pro writes "Well, I'm afraid that isn't possible. Your profile says you are "17 years of age"."I suppose you believe 1dustpelt to be 99 years old [1]? Profiles are not always accurate.Pro writes "much less an archbishop"There is no functional difference between an archbishop and a bishop.Pro writes "My opponent is a lier, and doesn't know what he's talking about"See? Ad hominem! I actually am a liar, but that has no bearing on the actual debate.Contention One: It is loved by soooooooo manyMy opponent makes the rather unusual argument that this debate is about an appeal to popularity. It's not. Observe the resolution, reproduced here for your convenience:"Sex" - The Resolution [2]It doesn't say "Sex is loved by a lot of people".My opponent then tries to justify his appeal to popularity by saying "Sex is GOOD. That is popular beleif.", however that is merely a textbook example of what an argumentum ad populum is.Sex DebatesNo, I sure wouldn't. Look at the main page of Debate.org [3], and scroll down to where it says "Popular Searches". The most popular search is George Bush. That hardly makes him popular, although I anticipate that my opponent will say otherwise. Also, look at this video [4], which has more views than any of those debates. However, it is hated.Definition of 'popular': "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general" [5]. Being viewed a lot just makes it known, not necessarily regarded with favor or approval.There are jobs about sexMy opponent has presented this [6]. This argument fails to support your point, because regardless of whether or not you love garbage, this doesn't necessarily show that garbage is loved by so many.Just by you and Oscar.There are movies about sexPro writes "Nothing but conspiracies."Exactly! Nothing but Jewish conspiracies dominating the media and influencing minds. I provided numerous sources giving evidence in favor of Zionist control over the media [7][8], and I am frankly unsurprised that my opponent dropped that argument almost completely, because it clearly cannot be refuted.Sex is in our earsMy opponent has plagiarized my argument from Round 2, where I wrote "Cross-apply my irrefutable point". Obviously, he thought he could trick me by removing the hyphen and changing "irrefutable point" to "arguments" (because his arguments are quite refutable). However, I picked up on it and I hope the readers do as well.It's what SELLSPro writes "Again, cross apply my arguments on Jews."It is quite clear that this is blatant plagiarism. In Round 2, I wrote "Again, cross-apply my point about the Jewish conspiracy.". By removing the hyphen, changing "point" to "arguments", and modifying "Jewish conspiracy" to "Jews", my opponent has tried to turn my own argument against me.I am shocked that my opponent has the audacity to steal my arguments when all the readers need to do is scroll up one round to see that they were quite clearly mine.Contention Two: It feels goodPro writes "Brussel sprouts are fvcking delicious."This is clear evidence that my opponent is a liar. He knows he doesn't like brussel sprouts, I know he doesn't like brussel sprouts, and you know he doesn't like brussel sprouts. He's trying to counter my uncounterable point by claiming brussel sprouts are delicious, but they certainly are not. If anyone reading this has tried a brussel sprout, they will see why this pathetic response fails.Pro writes "Anyways, I find many fruits and veggies delicious. Vegiterians love them, and they are quite healthy people."Lies. I am actually a vegetarian, and I hate vegetables. I am also unhealthy, because I eat processed foods all the time. Nature. Yuck.Pro writes "Dark Chocolate: GOOD FOR THE HEART."Dark chocolate doesn't taste that good either. That stuff is bitter as hell.Pro writes "And I imagine he has SEX WITH ME."This shows my opponent has had his mind brainwashed by Jews. Nothing could have been further from the implications I intended to give by writing what I wrote.Pro writes "AND HE IS AN ARCHBISHOP."My opponent has contradicted himself. With regards to my claim to be an Archbishop, he wrote "Well, I'm afraid that isn't possible." [2].Either I'm an Archbishop or I'm not. My opponent cannot have it both ways.Contention Three: Even the Church is good with sexLay people are fallible. The Magisterium is infallible. The Magisterium is composed of old virgin men.Also, I have discovered a novel argument against my opponent. While the Church so far is okay with marital sex, marital sex actually does not exist and is merely a myth [9]. Any married man can tell you this is true.So the Church has managed to oppose all forms of sex by allowing a form of sex that doesn't actually exist, and hoping that no one would notice. My argument here stands.Counter-Contention One: Jewish ConspiracyIf by "attacked" my opponent means "wrote a couple of unsubstantiated lines in rebuttal to brilliant arguments and walls of sources", then I suppose my opponent did "attack" this argument.Counter-Contention Two: Natural LawCondoms have a failure rate, as I'm sure you know [10]. Thus, my argument stands. Babies will still be created, just at a much lower rate. It is still immoral, because it still causes people to exist.Counter-Contention Three: DivisionPro writes "I'm really out of my game."I agree.Pro writes "SHE IS WRONG."Prove it.My opponent has failed to respond to my arguments that sex causes division and and drama, which are prima facie immoral. In fact, he has agreed that sex does cause "devision", so I think this argument should probably be extended. Yes. Extend my argument.Pro writes "You suffer mental anguish because you have to try not to think about sex? AHA. Cause it is so...... AWESOME."Non-sequitur.Pro writes "He is saying it is hard to resist it, becausev it is SO GOOD."No, I'm saying it's hard to resist because it's powerful. Resisting a building falling on you and crushing you flat is hard to resist, yet not good.Pro writes "Oh, and AlwaysMoreThanYou, I thought we agreed to keep our mad passionate sexual love life out of this. Geez, your a blabbermouth. If you don't keep it down, I'll go back to Zaradi."FINE! LEAVE ME! SEE IF I CARE! :'(Conclusion:Heheh. Extend my argument.Sources:1. http://www.debate.org... 2. http://debate.org...;3. http://www.debate.org...;4. http://bit.ly...;5. http://dictionary.reference.com...;6. http://www.handsoffhaywoodhigh.org.uk...;7. http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com...;8. http://www.jewishjournal.com...9. http://answers.yahoo.com...;10. http://www.americanpregnancy.org...