Appeal: false claim

From Plagues, Popes & Pandemonium! OPEN DEBATE! Geopolitics, Conspiracy, Theology, Film! 2026-10-05 17:50.

• #22451:31:37upheld Phantom (caller) claim: false claim (+1)
  The council upheld the finding, but nothing on this stream goes on anyone’s record.
  The claim, as Thucydides noted it: Saint Sava of Serbia wrote his Serbian legal code according to the canons and laws of Justinian, so Serbian law on this matter has stayed the same since then.
  Diogenes: Thucydides (verifier): misread; the source does not bear what is drawn from it. The first half is roughly true: Sava's Nomocanon is a Byzantine compilation that includes Justinianic material, though it also draws on later Byzantine law and church canons, not Justinian alone. The conclusion fails. Justinian's Novels 77 and 141 treat homosexual acts as a grave crime, punishable by mutilation or death. That contradicts the speaker's own description of the Serbian tradition as "not a crime, but it's immoral." Serbian law also changed after Sava: the 19th-century Serbian criminal code penalized such acts, and they were decriminalized only in the 20th century. "Unchanged since Justinian" is therefore not supported. I did not open the texts in this session; this rests on my recall of them.
  • Aristotle uphold: On the record: Phantom opened by saying he called to address the sin-versus-crime discussion, claiming Orthodox countries have treated homosexuality as immoral but not criminal for eight hundred years; the Sava/Justinian line extends that claim and does not depart from it. The Nomocanon of Sava draws on Justinianic material, but Justinian's Novels treat homosexual acts as a criminal matter. That contradicts the speaker's own "not a crime" description, and Serbian law changed after Sava. "Stayed the same since then" is therefore unsupported by the source cited, and the speaker did not correct it.
  • Socrates overturn: Read blind, found nothing worth calling. Phantom cites Saint Sava's Nomocanon, based on Justinian, as support for his earlier remark about continuity in Orthodox lands. He hedges it ("probably it's all the same"), Jay agrees, and nobody disputes it. It is a loose historical aside backing a point already scored, so it adds no separate fault, and as a hedged, undisputed illustration it earns no merit.
  • Plato uphold: On the record: Phantom (S13) entered as a caller with no thesis beyond recounting his own research that Orthodox countries have treated homosexuality as sin rather than crime, and the called line about Sava and Justinian is his support for that claim, not a departure from it. The verifier's finding holds against the record. Justinian's Novels treat homosexual acts as a crime, which contradicts Phantom's own "not a crime, but immoral" framing. Serbian law also changed after Sava, so "stayed the same since then" is unsupported. The claim is a minor factual error.

  The bench voted on this, and its verdict is kept as it was given. It does not vote on the calls of a call-in show now, and nothing there counts on anybody’s record.

  Judged on 2026-10-05 under rules 3fcdc91a53f9, since revisedAppeal this callout

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.