"Pro then says things existed before evidence of them, but this seems to ignore why we believe in them"
I suggest you to avoid circular logic in your vote.
topic is that we dont need a reason to believe in God. Saying that "this seems to ignore reason for belief" is circular reasoning and biased vote.
this isnt "Fail or succeed" topic. tell your chatgPt to stop failing in understanding what topic is.
Its not worthy to dedicate much to debate section right now. Obviously debaters and voters just ignore your arguments, and even use blatant lies in votes. It is better to wait until they fix these issues.
"Then report it"
I never report votes, which could be a reason people take it as a hint that they can cast obviously bad votes.
You get it, but these other people dont.
Whats up with these revenge votes lol
My opponent argues that maximally great being doesnt exist. I argue against that statement.
Logically impossible statement.
God, winning is worse than losing.
"Also you are losing track of all your debates"
Yes, I forgot which argument I wanted to make in that one.
"Women thought he was hot"
Unproved claim.
Do you think he is hot?
This is why I hate winning.
If Mall has accepted this, then I trust it will be interesting.
there goes my vote
Sometimes the effort is just not worth it.
that too, but I will go for something else.
I think I already hinted a lot of arguments I will use here. this isnt to say Con position is unwinnable, I am sure Con will come up with something too.
Do you believe in free will?
theism just means belief in God or Gods.
that one is truism too. It is logically impossible for atheist to believe in God.
I suggest writing it in description. As it stands now, you are saying Israel is most dangerous for EVERY SINGLE HUMAN. I can see such wide claim being taken advantage of by opponent, and basically defeated by only 1 exception. I suggest avoid making such wide claims, it only gives you more disadvantage in a debate, and forces you to defend more cases, or in this case, defend case for every single human.
No one challenges this, it seems.
More dangerous than Russia?
tho some good votes would be nice
Yes, so if you lose, you lose like 40 ratings, and if you win, you win like 2 rating.
Please accept and try that.
I hope someone accepts. Its not like this topic is impossible to argue against!
So I win?
But this debate is practically unwinnable for your opponent. Your opponent has to prove Hitler is who Hitler says he is, not what history says.
