Resolved: A world where no one can lie, is better than the world we live in right now.

Thanks to Pro for posting his arguments.I did not expect the debate the turn out like this, however, I guess this could work.Now, both of Pro's contentions could be easily refuted with one point.If you scroll up to Pro's opening round, he defines a lie as: "being a deliberate spoken untruth", meaning that the party lying must know that they are lying and deceiving others.Now did Bush know that there were no WMD in Iraq before going to war, or no connection to Al Qaeda?Now this is not a debate on the reasons Bush went to war, so I will not go into detail on this.Sure, the CIA found there were no WMD in Iraq and Hussein had no connection to Al Qaeda. But maybe, they realized this after Bush declared war on Iraq, meaning there was a different reason for going to war with Iraq, perhaps to promote democracy, as you say (and before you say anything, maybe Iraq was just first on the US's list on countries to promote democracy for). This would mean that Bush did not lie when going to world with Iraq, but lying later in order to cover up his mistake and to save face.In fact, lying later by saying that he went to war with Iraq to combat terrorism and to destroy WMD, would actually save American families lots of grief, as they would know their sons and daughters went to war for a noble cause, not just something random. And Iraqi families would think, my son died protecting my country.Now moving on to your catholic church contention.Well, first, I must point out that in the source you provided, I noticed that the title was "BBC Accuses Church of Worldwide Condom Misinformation Campaign".http://www.c-fam.org...Accuses means that BBC thinks that the Church was spreading misinformation, however, it has not yet been proven whether or not the Church intended to lie about the condoms.In fact, it seems more likely that the church did not lie about the condoms. What does it have to gain from lying about condoms? Nothing, really. It seems as though the church truly thought that the condoms did not work.Take a look at this scenario.Some few hundred years back, the church burned witches at the stake because they practiced "witchcraft". Obviously there is no such thing as witches or witchcraft. However, the Church truly thought that witches were real, so they were not lying by saying that those people were witches and are going to be executed. http://home.comcast.net...;It is the same with this. The church truly believed that the condoms did not work, so they did not lie, because they believed it to be the truth. In fact, if they lied by saying that the condoms did work, more people would use the condoms and prevent the transmission of aids. Therefore, sometimes when people lie, the world becomes a happier place. ================Arguments================C.1.: Protecting othersImagine that many people thought that you were a loser, and someone who is a bad at debating. You want to know what people think about you.In a world where no one can lie, everyone must tell the truth, and say that you are a loser and bad at debating. What would that do? That would crush your self esteem, you would not want to debate ever again. That would give you depression and anxiety, you would feel sad from bing called a loser and be anxious to try to win everyone's favour back. That would damage your relationship with others, as you now know everyone thinks that you are a loser.As Pro pointed out in the previous round, "All three of these above stated things is some form of unhappiness". However, I have pointed out a real life example where these occur from not lying. Pro has not proven that these symptoms occur from lying.In the above scenario, if everyone lied and said that you were the best debater and the coolest guy ever, your self esteem would not shatter. You would feel more confident and better about yourself. You would not experience depression or anxiety. In fact, you would be really happy about what others think about you. Your relationships with others would not be damanged, in fact, they would improve as you try to get closer to everyone because you think that they think you are cool. After time, people could change their feelings and grow to genuinely like you.Before Pro says that he would feel much better if people told him the real truth by saying he is a loser, please understand that that is not logical at all. No one would feel good if people told each other that they were losers. Everyone would be happier if they lied and said that they were the coolest people ever.Therefore, in our world right now we have the ability to lie at our discretion. Sometimes it is much better to lie. Other times it is much better to tell the truth. When we have this ability to choose, we have a much happier world. We build relations with each other. And overall, our world would be much better and happier.C.2: Self protectionNow imagine you have a family of 4. An insane gun murderer serial killer breaks into your house. You tell your family to run to the car to get away while you distract the gun murderer. The gun murderer wants to rape your wife. He demands that you tell him where she is.Now let's look at this logically. Obviously, you love your wife. You don't want her to be injured. In a world where you cannot lie, you must say that she is in the garage trying to get away. Then the gun murderer would go to the garage and catch up to her, since you were unable to delay him because you can't lie, and rape her then kill her. Obviously you would be very devastated. In fact, it would be on your concious for the rest of your life, that you led the murderer to kill your wife, that you indirectly caused the death of your entire family. You would feel sad, you would never be able to live with yourself again. Please, Pro, explain how a world like this would be better than this world we live in right now.Now back to our world. Now you are able to lie. The gun murderer asks you where your wife is. You lie by saying she's upstairs in your bedroom under the bed. He goes there. By doing so, you buy the time for your wife to get away in the car. Now your family won't die, and they are able to call the cops to arrest the murderer and bring him to justice. In a world where you are able to lie, in our world, you are able to protect people you love. Lying is necessary to survival, to human life. Everyone lies, and has lied, and will lie, that is a fact. With lies, you are able to protect yourself and your loved ones. Generally, if you are alive, you are happier. Therefore, a world where people are able to lie, the world right now, would be better than a world where no one can lie. Conclusion:Pro, unlike me, has not provided real tangible reasons where not lying and telling the truth would be so much better. Furthermore, he provides facts from the past (i.e. the iraq war), when the resolution clearly says "right now". That means that data from the past is irrelevant and scenarios, such as the one I have provided, must be used as proof instead.Therefore, as Pro did not prove that both Bush and the Catholic Church intended to lie, and did not just mistakenly lie, both his arguments are invalid. Furthermore, they are also invalid because they are not relevant to "right now".As a result, Pro has lost this debate.Vote Con.Vote HardCore.Pwnography.