Appeal: direct answer
From Religion Debate: Islam vs Christianity.
- #11432:14:07upheld Sam Shamoun epainos: direct answer (+2)
The council upheld the call: Sam Shamoun earned 2 points.
“So, yes, I condemn it, which is why I condemn your prophet.”
Diogenes: Daniel demanded four or five times that his opponents condemn child marriage and predicted they would dodge; Sam gives the plain answer, with his reading of the twelve-year threshold in the sources Daniel cited.- Aristotle uphold: On the record: This is consistent with Sam's standing method of engaging Daniel's challenges directly with textual reasoning, and represents a genuine direct answer rather than evasion. Daniel repeatedly demanded (multiple times) that Sam condemn child marriage per Aquinas/canon law; Sam gives the plain, explicit answer here ("yes, I condemn it") with substantive reasoning about the 12-year threshold and puberty requirement in the sources cited, directly answering the question actually asked.
- Socrates uphold: Read blind, found "direct answer". After being repeatedly pressed across several turns to explicitly "condemn child marriage," Sam here gives a plain, unambiguous answer ("Yes, I condemn it") rather than continuing to deflect, directly meeting the demand that had been put to him.
- Plato uphold: On the record: S3's position throughout treats Muhammad's marriage to Aisha as evidence against his prophetic status, and Daniel repeatedly demanded that Sam explicitly condemn child marriage; here Sam gives that direct condemnation and ties it back to his standing critique of Muhammad, consistent with his position. This is a plain, direct answer to a question Daniel had put repeatedly and explicitly predicted would be dodged, consistent with Sam's sustained position rather than a departure from it.
Appeal this callout
Appeals come only from the debaters themselves. Sign in with Google to start; you'll then prove which debater you are, once.