After listening to Patrick Donahue in all of these debates, he is way over his head. Rarely does he answer the direct questions posed. Also, he jumps all over the bible plucking out verses in isolation which is so typical of Protestant apologetics. His logic in most cases is fallacial.
John Martignoni is not the most able Catholic apologist, but very effective and really easy to understand without using huge theological concepts.
That said, he easily disposes of Donahue's tradition in all of their debates

Both men did a good job defending their position. However...

No, Patrick "jumps" over the Bible plucking verses out in order to make his points, and he made his points.

It is unfortunate that John, who also "jumps" over the Bible plucking out verses, cannot produce one verse or one example of infant baptism. The reason is simple; there is no such verse. It is very strange that John is defending a practice that cannot be found in scripture.

John is more convincing. My brothers in Christ, there isn't a clear answer to this question. Read the Dedache and look to the old testament scriptures concerning the 8 day-old jewish born son being circumcised. This is the answer to this question. Unfortunately there are 40,000 different Protestant denominations that can answer this question, all believing themselves to have the right answer. Yet Catholics, 1.1 billion in number, as well as many protestant denominations, who share the same belief as the same church that Jesus founded, belueve that infant baptism both washes away sin and brings that infant into Gods family, I pray that this doesnt divid us.