David Nichols (PRO)The rectum is a digestive organ whose sole purpose is to evacuate feces.
Return To Top | Posted:
2021-01-05 10:20:06
| Speak Round
ItWasTaken (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 RoundDavid 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 RoundItWasTaken (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 RoundDavid 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 RoundItWasTaken (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.
I thank Pro for this debate and wish him well.
Return To Top | Posted:
2021-01-06 09:07:52
| Speak Round
Judge: Gekk
ItWas--You make no sense.Posted 2021-01-06 09:51:07
I was correcting my typo. Posted 2021-01-06 08:58:30
ItWas--I have no idea what you're talking about.Posted 2021-01-06 07:54:39
"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