Any ideas?

Hi everyone! I need to base my research on a topic which has multiple existing and fallacious arguments (at least 6-8), and provide suggestions on how to make it not fallacious. Some examples of a topic would be arguments regarding Covid vaccines and religious beliefs about the bible. Is there any other interesting topics you have in mind for me to explore? Thanks in advance!

Sharon, I thought it would be an interesting exercise to google logically fallacies and covid vaccines and this is what I found:
https://youcanknowthings.com/2022/02/05/10-logical-fallacies-used-in-vaccine-arguments/

'#1: The false dichotomy fallacy
“If the COVID vaccines work, then why are vaccinated people getting COVID?”

... This is a false dichotomy, as it suggests there are only two possible options for vaccine efficacy: (1) the vaccines stop 100% of infections all the time or (2) the vaccines are completely ineffective. In reality, neither of these options is correct. Vaccines reduce the risk of infection, hospitalization, and death (what scientists mean when they say the vaccines ‘work’), but they don’t completely eliminate it (some breakthrough infections will happen). ... '

Comment: Of course, some people's arguments are more nuanced. They might accept efficacy less than 100% but not agree with claims that the demonstrated efficacy outweighs risk and when they ask "why are the vaccinated getting covid?" they don't mean why are any vaccinated at all getting covid but why are a substantial number getting covid? In a sense, we might say this claim of false dichotomy is itself a straw man because many of those who claim the vaccines don't work don't say it simply because they think a small number are getting covid but a substantial number - of course, then you can argue numbers.

'#2: The appeal to authority fallacy
“Here’s a doctor who says you’re wrong.”'

Comment: This one does amuse me I must say because, of course, some would say that people argue for what the authorities say and demand simply because the authorities are saying it and demanding it ... and they believe scientific claims simple because they appear in medical and scientific journals, they don't countenance critiques of these scientific claims by dissident scientists and health professionals.

I'll leave the others for your own perusal.

This is a very radical idea on the vexatious vaccine issue that I came across only very recently. While some argue that it wasn't the smallpox vaccine that eradicated smallpox, it was improvements in living standards, Russian naturopath, Katerina Sugak, argues that smallpox was simply never a distinct illness but rather an umbrella for a number of conditions such as chicken pox, measles, rashes caused by chemicals and so on meaning no eradication has occurred, it's just that cases people might have determined in the past were smallpox they now determine to be chicken pox, etc.

Facts that tend to support this theory over both the vaccination and living standards theories in my opinion:

• The percentage of the global population vaccinated at any one time against smallpox has only ever been small
• The vaccine didn't stop people getting what was determined to be cases of smallpox after vaccination
• Smallpox didn't have a set of symptoms that clearly distinguished it from other illnesses
• Living conditions have not particularly improved all over the world

Katerina Sugak - The Truth about Smallpox (1hr 8m)
https://odysee.com/@katie.su:7/thetruthaboutsmallpox:9

Supposedly, the last death from smallpox was that of Janet Parker on 11 September 1978 in Birmingham, UK who, it seems, was infected at a lab. Her death indirectly led to the death of the head of the microbiology department where the infection occurred who suicided over his guilt over her death and apparently her father died of cardiac arrest after visiting her in hospital. 
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1978_smallpox_outbreak_in_the_United_Kingdom

Being so preposterously radical, a wealth of fallacies are to be found in Katerina's argument I'm sure.