The Problem With Faith: Religion Is Destroying Humanity: The illusion of love

" You were a prime example in your first RD of simply not being able to READ which is a typical miss-steak of nearly 100% of the so-called christians here on DDO who have presented their colors in flying uterus detail before spawning their rectal thermometers at the teleprompters. And I either insult them in which they rightly deserve, Or I walk away, In which they rightly deserve. Either way, I don"t put up with it, Not for any reason, Not ever. Oh and oh yeah, Both are widely taught in college to do right. " ---I'm not even a christian. I've stated this. In fact, I think I may be less religious than Pro in this regard! Pro tends to hold such strong belief against a deity that it forms the very religious aspects they argue against. For example: Pro declares that when interacting with "so-called christians" they will "either insult them in which they rightly deserve" or "walk away, In which they rightly deserve". These are similar characteristics of many theistic religions. Some shade of self-criticism may be due in Pro's next argument. "Well um gee, Um no I don"t claim ALL of the article as being correct. " ---Yet you only want that to represent your argument. Nothing else that you state, Do you want to be held accountable for. "Your opponent was the article, NOT ME" ---So nothing Pro states can hold water with the topic because they are not in a position to debate. Pro is a viewer and they should simply read my arguments and wait for "the article" to post theirs if that is the case, Then place a vote based on who had the better arguments, Sources, Etc. By forfeiting this position to a source, Pro concedes any ability to make arguments. "You really don"t know how to debate all that well now do you? " ---Looking over each round, It's easy to determine who is debating properly and is effectively the better debater, But we'll leave the overall ruling to the voters. "Strange isn"t it that bible verses are quoted all the time in people"s debates, But not someone else"s quotes in debates with the genie-us e-u. ? " ---The only quotes I've used were provided by Pro or me quoting Pro. I have not used any verses from the bible to claim the topic as false. "not being stable to recognize to debate the article and not me" ---Here lies the issue with Pro holding no position in this debate. Suppose I discriminate between the two and direct all arguments to the article. Suppose I claim the article is false and doesn't hold any water with the topic of debate. The article will not respond, Rather Pro will have to be a mouthpiece on it's behalf (again, Much resembling that of a christian being a mouthpiece for the bible). Pro can comment in the comment section, But since they have denied taking responsibility for the argument, They cannot make arguments on behalf of the article in a contribution to the debate. Least, The voters cannot regard Pro's arguments as contributory information because Pro has annexed themselves from that position. "This debate is now over. We"re done. " ---Pro continues to abandon making arguments. I agree with Pro here. The debate is unproductive at this point and no new points in regard to the topic are being made or refuted. Look, Clearly something I said struck a cord with Pro. Pro has completely disregarded the topic and began attacking personal character instead of my arguments. It's a clear victory for me. Even though I wished to combat Pro's refutes or reproaches, It seems as though this discussion is no longer productive. I will end this round in hopes that the last round will have a constructive argument for both sides and give the voter something to critically ponder over. However, It is my suspicion that without an immense deal of evidence, That Pro will be unable to make a sound argument worthy of a vote. See ya in round four!