EDEB8 - Ultimate Online Debating
About Us   Debate    Judge   Forum
Views:
742

The rectum is not a sex organ.

(PRO)
0 points
(CON)
WINNER!
3 points
ItWasTakenItWasTaken (CON)
The rectum is a multipurpose organ. 

Pro states that the rectum is not a sex organ. Because he failed to define 'sex organ', I will establish the definition for my argument. 
Sex Organ: "an organ of the reproductive system". 
This, of course, leaves us to define 'reproductive system'. 
Reproductive System: "the system of organs and parts which function in reproduction consisting in the male especially of the testes, penis, seminal vesicles, prostate, and urethra and in the female especially of the ovaries, fallopian tubes, uterus, vagina, and vulva"

Because the male prostate is listed as part of the reproductive system, and that access to the prostate, for the purposes of sexual stimulation is through the rectum, I think I have proved that the rectum is indeed a sex organ. 







Return To Top | Posted:
2021-01-06 00:08:15
| Speak Round
David NicholsDavid Nichols (PRO)
1.Con is making up a definition of "rectum"---examination of, and access to, the prostate are not purposes of the rectum. 2.Although the prostate can be accessed through the rectum, the rectum itself is not a part of the reproductive system.
Return To Top | Posted:
2021-01-06 06:03:00
| Speak Round
ItWasTakenItWasTaken (CON)
 Pro may be correct if his position was "The sole evolutionary function of the rectum is to evacuated feces." As it stands, however, he has made a different argument. 
His rebuttal falls short of both buttressing his original position, and of countering my position. 

Return To Top | Posted:
2021-01-06 06:55:39
| Speak Round
David NicholsDavid Nichols (PRO)
All organ functions are evolutionary. Con makes me laugh. Perhaps he means that the rectum can be used in ways it wasn't designed for. Yes, a rectum can be used for sex...so could an ear canal...if it were larger. Would con argue the ear canal is a sex organ too?
Return To Top | Posted:
2021-01-06 07:43:56
| Speak Round
ItWasTakenItWasTaken (CON)
The rules, as decided by Pro, prohibit cross examination. He has broken this rule. I ask the judges to take this into account. 

Pro has yet again failed to buttress his argument with anything other than opinion. 

In conclusion, it is enough to say that people do use the rectum for sexual purposes and that fact disproves Pro's argument. Keep in mind, his argument was not that the use of the rectum for sexual purposes goes against its evolutional function. 
In other words, it would be accurate to say that pliers are not designed to be used as a hammer. It would be inaccurate to state that pliers are not a hammer. The mere fact that some people do use them as a hammer disproves the presupposition. 

I thank Pro for this debate and wish him well. 

Return To Top | Posted:
2021-01-06 09:07:52
| Speak Round


View As PDF

Enjoyed this debate? Please share it!

You need to be logged in to be able to comment
David NicholsDavid Nichols
ItWas--You make no sense.
Posted 2021-01-06 09:51:07
ItWasTakenItWasTaken
I was correcting my typo.
Posted 2021-01-06 08:58:30
David NicholsDavid Nichols
ItWas--I have no idea what you're talking about.
Posted 2021-01-06 07:54:39
ItWasTakenItWasTaken
"The sole evolutionary function of the rectum is to evacuated feces." should read: "The sole evolutionary function of the rectum is to evacuate feces."
Posted 2021-01-06 07:02:56
The judging period on this debate is over

Previous Judgments

2021-01-06 09:32:44
ZackDavis1997Judge: ZackDavis1997
Win awarded to: ItWasTaken
Reasoning:
ITWasTaken not only followed the rules laid out in the debate, but he also cited definitions, as well as explained more in depth his reasoning in each panel.

Feedback:
ItwasTaken it was not really a big deal but try to show where you received your definition, example as defined by. David Nichols the cross examination was a mistake, but the only problem I saw was to use your position as opening statement a little more wisely, discuss your points more as the one who initiates the conversation.
1 user rated this judgement as constructive
1 comment on this judgement
ItWasTakenItWasTaken
Thank you for your feedback. I am new to this site and unfamiliar with the inner working of it. Are you not able to see the hyperlinks that I used for my references and definitions? They show up blue to me. I had originally listed them at the bottom, however, the 1,000 word constraint did not allow for anything other than a hyperlink.
Posted 2021-01-06 09:56:09
2021-01-07 08:28:05
RishiD123Judge: RishiD123
Win awarded to: ItWasTaken
Reasoning:
I am awarding this win to ItWasTaken because he was able to roadmap his argument in a clear and specific way which Pro was not able to do. He was also able to substantiate his claims with empirical evidence and use logic to justify his stance.
1 user rated this judgement as exceptional
0 comments on this judgement
2021-01-08 07:15:08
GekkJudge: Gekk
Win awarded to: ItWasTaken

Rules of the debate

  • Text debate
  • Individual debate
  • 3 rounds
  • 1000 characters per round
  • No reply speeches
  • No cross-examination
  • Permissive Judging Standard (notes)
  • Forfeiting rounds means forfeiting the debate
  • Images allowed
  • HTML formatting allowed
  • Rated debate
  • Time to post: 3 days
  • Time to vote: 3 days
  • Time to prepare: None