On balance, the rise of China is beneficial to the interests of the United States.

Likethetree

This is a three round debate, the first round will be just for the basis of accepting the round. Any arguments made in the first round should be disregarded. The second will be a speech, no rebuttals should be made in that speech. The third round will be a rebuttal speech, with no new arguments brought up in that round. This is a past National Forensics League PF resolution (February 2013). Thank you....

Post Voting Period
9 Comments
Updated 4 Months Ago

The Purpose of the US Constitution is to Legislate Morality

wrichcirw
RoyLatham

I have made this debate impossible to accept. If you are interested, just leave a comment or PM me, thank you. I am curious to see how anyone can argue that the purpose of any law is not to legislate morality. Resolution:The Purpose of the US Constitution is to Legislate Morality

Post Voting Period
122 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

The US Constitution Legislates Morality

wrichcirw

I am curious to see how anyone can argue that any law does not legislate morality. To this end, I made the statement that the Constitution legislates morality, a point to which CON contested.Resolution:The US Constitution Legislates Morality(i.e., the purpose of the Constitution is to legislate morality - obviously the...

Post Voting Period
137 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

(MiG Tournament) Physical laws must conform to preconceptions of what is logical

KRFournier
RoyLatham

This debate is part of round 5 of Man-Is-Good's Debate Tournament.SynopsisRoyLatham and I just finished another tournament debate over the implications of the KCA, which you can reference here:http://www.debate.org/debate/25114/In this debate, we argued over whether or not something that is mathematically possible can be considered to therefore be physically p...

Post Voting Period
39 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

Music Competition of Awesomeness

Wallstreetatheist

Music Competition of AwesomenessFormat1: Acceptance, Clarifications2-4: Instrument Shredding BadasseryRules

Post Voting Period
20 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

God is a logical impossibility

000ike

This is designed to be a quick and straightforward debate. God: The divine author of all things; the creator of the universe and the laws thereof. An omniscient, and omnipotent being. At no point can this definition be questioned or altered by either side in the course of this debate. 5000 character limit, Round 1 is for acceptance. ...

Post Voting Period
205 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

Our greatest taboo should be permitted for investigation and debate

MassDebater69

This debate will be about whether or not there is significant justification for free speech and inquiry pertaining to a particular historical event. Of the various taboos present in Western and European society, discussion of the Holocaust is often regarded as the most significant. It being part of the curriculum for nearly every school in America and abroad, it is no wonder why this event has such a major impact on us, particularly when we hear details of the oppression that occurred during...

Post Voting Period
68 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

Libertarians should support Romney

RoyLatham

This debate is whether libertarians should support Mitt Romney in the upcoming U.S. presidential election rather than support a third party candidate such as Gary Johnson. Supporting President Obama is ruled out for this debate.The right of third party candidates to run for office and of voters to vote for them is not questioned. The debate presumes that libertarians want to have libertarian views, as generally espoused by Ron Paul or Gary Johnson (per

28 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

Determinism is true

Stephen_Hawkins

The debate is simple: any specifics can be discussed in comments. First round is for acceptance. My opponent must defend libertarianism. Burden of Proof is shared.DefinitionsDeterminism is the philosophical idea that every event or state of affairs, including every human decision and action, is the inevitable consequence of antecedent states of affairs. (

9 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago

The modal ontological argument is not sound

socialpinko
KRFournier

This is for Phantom's 99th Percentile tournament. The debate will focus on whether or not the modal ontological argument is sound. I as Pro to the resolution will argue that it is not while my opponent as Con will argue that it is. The relevant terms are defined as follows:Modal ontological argument-(P1) It is possible that that God exists. (P2) God is not a contingent being, i.e., either it is not possible that God exists, or it is necessary that God exi...

Post Voting Period
26 Comments
Updated 1 Year Ago