Each of the Ten Commandments is either unnecessary or incomplete.

Thanks for your response, Genesis Creation."I will post rebuttal next round, since this round was primarily for opening arguments."I remind my opponent that I stated this in the introduction: "For round two, I will present my cases against each of the commandments, and then we'll naturally take it from there. The structure is fairly loose on this one." I was actually hoping that my opponent would begin his refutations as soon as possible, since now it seems a round had been wasted. However, I am probably to blame for not having created a more rigid structure for this debate. I digress.I must also remind my opponent that the proposition is this: "Each of the Ten Commandments (as listed in the King James' Version of the Bible) is either unnecessary or incomplete for morally governing the lives of everyone" and "everyone" is defined as "every person who exists". You must not only prove that one of the commandments is "generally" good, but that it is "always" good; not that one of them is satisfactory, but totally infallible.My opponent says we can generally see the benefits of the last six commandments, but in no way even hints to have having read anything I typed in objection to them. Therefore, I will keep this brief and await my opponent's actual refutations.5. Honor thy mother and fatherAgain, this may be a good rule of thumb for many (or even most) situations. But it is wicked to expect a victim of child abuse to honor his/her abuser(s).6. Thou shall not killThis commandment does not read "Thou shall not murder" but "Thou shall not kill". Therefore, it necessarily includes all acts of self-defense and even the killing of animals for food.7. Thou shall not commit adultery.Generally, people in modern cultures do appreciate this commandment. However, my scenario of an arranged marriage remains unchallenged.8. Thou shall not steal.It's true. Nobody likes to have their stuff stolen. But which is worse, a supermarket losing four or five sandwiches or a family starving to death? My opponent also does not address the idea of stealing things which were stolen from you in the first place.9. Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.Yes, lying in a court of law could potentially send an innocent person to prison (though testimonies are hardly considered substantiated evidence by themselves); conversely, though, it is conceivable that lying in a court of law could potentially allow an innocent person who was being unjustly tried go free. For example, if your innocent wife was on trial for homicide, you could fabricate an alibi saying she was with you at the time of the murder to avoid her being sent to prison. Such a thing is, of course, legally wrong, but is it morally wrong?10. Thou shall not covet thy neighbor's stuff.My opponent says this commandment proves beneficial if you want to keep your neighbor away from your things. Perhaps, then, the commandment should read "Thou shall not try to take your neighbor's stuff that doesn't belong to you" instead of "Thou shall not think about taking your neighbor's stuff that doesn't belong to you".My opponent goes on to make two unsubstantiated claims about me:1. "My opponent has argued on a basis of unchained freedom to do what-ever his heart desires."I am not trying to argue that it is morally right to do whatever you please; I am simply arguing that none of the ten commandments provides complete and necessary guidance for everyone. Where, Con, did I say that people should have unchained freedom to do whatever his/her heart desires?2. "It would appear that my opponent has a problem with the source, rather than the substance." This is another baseless and irrelevant objection. The fact that these ten commandments came out of the Bible is totally inconsequential to the debate at hand. The problem, by the way, that I have with these commandments is not where they came from, but what they claim to be moral tenets for lives of everyone.Over to you, Con.