The Instigator
MikeyMike
Con (against)
Winning
41 Points
The Contender
LlamaMan
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

A person cannot be in love with two people simultaneously

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 9 votes the winner is...
MikeyMike
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/23/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,258 times Debate No: 21441
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (9)

 

MikeyMike

Con

Yaaaay another cliche social perspective.

First round for acceptance, and for my opponent to post his/her argument if he/she so chooses.

Person: Human Being, Homo Sapien

In love: romantic love, Eros love.

Let's make this a good debate, no equivicating, or silly semantic tactics.

Come at me bro

or Bro-et...
LlamaMan

Pro

Hola!! Me llamo Llama Man!!
I'll let you start the arguments in round two.
So Good Luck!!!
Debate Round No. 1
MikeyMike

Con

sigh... i'm being trolled again...

plz dont vote pro..
LlamaMan

Pro

I'm not a troll I'm just in a good mood.

Yes a person can be in love with two people simultaneously because the people that you are in love with might be really hot twins.

If you don't argue then therefore I am the undeclared winner.
Debate Round No. 2
MikeyMike

Con

I agree that a person can be in love with 2 people simultaneously.

My opponent is Pro for the resolution but then makes a Con argument...

I guess I win.
LlamaMan

Pro

That's the way I roll chief mikeymike the third...
But I have the best (and only argument) for your side which makes me the winner for helping the ones that can't make their own arguments.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by kyro90 4 years ago
kyro90
Lol, yeah I am starting to get that feeling lol.
Posted by DakotaKrafick 4 years ago
DakotaKrafick
Does anyone else feel that "Who made more convincing arguments" should be changed to "Who do you feel won the debate"? Technically, Pro had the more convincing arguments, though they were in support of Con.
Posted by LlamaMan 4 years ago
LlamaMan
I wasn't trolling. (at least not on purpose, whether mikeymike thought I was trolling or not is his business) He should've at least attempted to debate....
And now I am losing because he thought I was a troll :(
Posted by MikeyMike 4 years ago
MikeyMike
The problem with that is you can't really define romantic love.. there is really no actual definition. We just know what it is when we feel it.
Posted by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
I'm so incredibly tempted to take this, but "romantic love" would have to be better defined.
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: hehehe, nice pro the only argument you gave supports why you can be in love with two ppl at the same time, which according to the resolution is the con's position
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 4 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:50 
Reasons for voting decision: Con and Pro make the Con argument. Con wins.
Vote Placed by Yep 4 years ago
Yep
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Trolled...
Vote Placed by Doulos1202 4 years ago
Doulos1202
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: looking forward to seeing llamaman lose is his account.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 4 years ago
RoyLatham
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro agreed with the resolution, conceding the debate. Pro failed to present a case affirming the resolution, a conduct violation.
Vote Placed by larztheloser 4 years ago
larztheloser
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro got confused between pro/con (mostly because the instigator made himself con, creating a confusing double negative) and tried a "one sentence wonder" argument. Neg win. Con should word the motion more clearly.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: The hot twin argument did it for me, as always.
Vote Placed by Xerge 4 years ago
Xerge
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Hmm, an interesting debate.... Pro made an argument for the Con side but failed to provide for his own side.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
MikeyMikeLlamaManTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro made an argument. Con agreed with the argument. The argument negated, so con wins. Conclusion: Pro is a horrible troll.