The Instigator
studentathletechristian8
Con (against)
Tied
7 Points
The Contender
leet4A1
Pro (for)
Tied
7 Points

All homosexuals should be grouped together and isolated in the Bermuda Triangle

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/29/2009 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 4,641 times Debate No: 8475
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

studentathletechristian8

Con

I stand in negation to the resolution, "RESOLVED: All homosexuals should be grouped together and isolated in the Bermuda Triangle."

In simple terms, the resolution means that all homosexuals should be moved to the Bermuda Triangle and left in isolation there.

An attempt to do this would simply be unfair and unconventional.

Affirmative goes first!
leet4A1

Pro

I stand in strong support of the resolution to move all homosexuals to the Bermuda Triangle to be left in isolation. I think doing this would be in the homosexual community's best interests so therefore, why not?

1. Homosexuals cop a lot of unwarrented crap from a lot of people in this country. You only have to look at some of the people on here who believe homosexuality is evil and is a learned behaviour brought upon by Satan, and a lot of other ridiculous, hate-filled garbage. Plus, there's this guy of course:

http://en.wikipedia.org...

If homosexuals were all confined to one area, they would never be the victim of hatred based upon their sexuality. This is obviously very beneficial to the gay community.

2. The Bermuda Triangle is a nice place, and homosexuals seem to like nice things. The area bound by what we all know as the Bermuda Triangle varies by author [1], but regardless which area the homosexuals choose to inhabit, you know it's going to be beautiful. Take Bermuda itself for example [2]. How many homosexuals do you know who wouldn't rather live on a paradise like that with thousands of other homosexuals?

3. Homosexuals like water. Observe: http://static.howstuffworks.com...

Well, I'll leave it there for this round. I thank my opponent for this debate and I hope I can change his ways.

[1] - http://en.wikipedia.org...
[2] - http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
studentathletechristian8

Con

I thank my opponent for accepting this interesting debate topic.

"I think doing this would be in the homosexual community's best interests so therefore, why not?"
I do not think doing this would be in the homosexual community's best interest, so why do it?

I shall now number my counterarguments to match my opponent's stated arguments (with corresponding numbers)

1. Homosexuals may cope a lot of unwarranted crap from people in this country, but approximately three-fourths of Americans support gay rights, so therefore, more people in this country support homosexuals and do not berate them. This would make homosexuals feel more comfortable knowing that although they receive crap from some people, they do not receive crap from the majority, for they are more accepted by the majority. (Notice my opponent has stated "this country," so I assume he refers to America, which I am also referring to) All groups of people receive criticisms and critiques, but that does not mean they should be isolated in the Bermuda Triangle. Obama receives a lot of crap from people, but should he be isolated in the Bermuda Triangle? No. That is against human rights. Get the point? The rest of the argument that follows is irrelevant; although there are people "on here" (I assume this is a reference to this website) that do not like gays, there are still many others who support them

"If homosexuals were all confined to one area, they would never be the victim of hatred based upon their sexuality. This is obviously very beneficial to the gay community."
If homosexuals were confined to one area, they would still be victims of hatred. People would openly make fun of them even more, for they figure they couldn't offend anyone now that all homosexuals were relocated. People would make crude remarks such as, "Man, we had to learn about triangles in geometry today. So I wouldn't get bored, I made the sides of the triangle look like gay penises touching each other, to look like what those gays are doing on the Bermuda Triangle." Besides, transporting all homosexuals to the Bermuda Triangle would not be beneficial to the gay community. Hundreds of millions of people are gay, so isolating ALL of them to the Bermuda Triangle would cost them a lot of money, cause overpopulation, and lead to embarrassment from being forced to move because of sexual orientation.

2. This argument seems very subjective. Not all homosexuals believe the Bermuda Triangle is a nice place. Not all homosexuals like nice things. Since not all homosexuals think the Bermuda Triangle is nice, it would cause grievances and depression among various gays who would be isolated there, which would in fact hamper the gay community. Not all of the Bermuda Triangle is beautiful, so many homosexuals would be disgruntled and unfulfilled in life. They would not be given their constitutional right to have a pursuit of happiness, and since it does not go against the majority of the people, it takes away from fundamental human rights. There are many homosexuals who would choose not to live in the Bermuda Triangle. They would not find it paradise. By you subjectively calling it a "paradise" does not mean it is paradise, which in fact it is not.

3. This point is irrelevant. Some homosexuals do not enjoy water, it could be that most of them do not, for "liking" something is simply subjective. This is not even relevant to the topic at hand.

"I hope I can change his ways."
What ways? My ways of wise judgement and acceptance? I would like to change your ways of ignorance.

Argument refuted. I urge a Con vote.
leet4A1

Pro

"Homosexuals may cope a lot of unwarranted crap from people in this country, but approximately three-fourths of Americans support gay rights, so therefore, more people in this country support homosexuals and do not berate them. This would make homosexuals feel more comfortable knowing that although they receive crap from some people, they do not receive crap from the majority, for they are more accepted by the majority. (Notice my opponent has stated "this country," so I assume he refers to America, which I am also referring to)"

Oh, 25%, is that all? There are 300,000,000 people in this country, meaning there are 75,000,000 people in this country who do not support gay rights. There is probably a higher percentage who support animal rights. If you went to a school where there were 1000 students, and 250 of them downright despised you and didn't mind letting you know it, you'd probably want to move schools if the opportunity presented itself. I am proposing we give homosexuals that opportunity.

"If homosexuals were confined to one area, they would still be victims of hatred. People would openly make fun of them even more, for they figure they couldn't offend anyone now that all homosexuals were relocated."

True though this may be, the point is that the homosexuals would no longer have to put up with the hatred. Rednecks will always be rednecks, hillbillies hillbillies, but if there were no homosexuals around to complain about and hate, I'm sure they'd move on to some other minority, like blacks or pensioners.

"People would make crude remarks such as, "Man, we had to learn about triangles in geometry today. So I wouldn't get bored, I made the sides of the triangle look like gay penises touching each other, to look like what those gays are doing on the Bermuda Triangle.""

I fear my opponent has accidentally supported my argument. If there is one thing in the world there is not enough of, it is good topical jokes. Leno and Conan can only do so much, the majority of topical jokes are made up by people like my opponent and I, and spread around the world at rapid pace. It is fun to hear topical jokes, and even funner to create them, and moving all homosexuals to the Bermuda Triangle would allow for some classics.

1. "Hey man, what does Steve have in common with the Bermuda Triangle?"
"Dunno, what?"
"They've both had thousands of gay men inside them."

2. "Hey man, I bought you a flight to the coolest spot on Earth!"
"Really, Hawaii?"
"No, something I bet YOU'D love even more than that. It's right up your alley."
"Wow, what a pleasant surprise. Dubai? New Zealand?"
"No.... THE BERMUDA TRIANGLE! BOOM SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE THE ROOM, BOOM SHAKE SHAKE SHAKE THE ROOM, TICK TICK TICK TICK BOOM!"
"I have been burned. I am now less of a man for some reason." *Cries and loses girlfriend to joke-teller*

Well you get the point. It would be fun.

"Hundreds of millions of people are gay, so isolating ALL of them to the Bermuda Triangle would cost them a lot of money, cause overpopulation, and lead to embarrassment from being forced to move because of sexual orientation."

Oh, you misunderstand me. I'm not arguing that we FORCE them to move to the Bermuda Triangle. I'm saying we give them the opportunity to do so. I am also arguing that it would be in the best interests of the gay community to make the move, and that they would all be in on it. Sure it would cost a lot of money, but money isn't everything you know. I think the well-being of the gay community is beyond mere monetary issues. For the first time in their lives, there would be NO embarrassment at all, quite contrary to what you've said. As for overpopulation, I've taken the liberty of doing the maths. Now, in my first round I clearly stated that I was only arguing on behalf of homosexuals in THIS COUNTRY. My opponent agreed to this term by saying "Notice my opponent has stated "this country," so I assume he refers to America, which I am also referring to."

Therefore, as only 4.3 million American citizens identify themselves as homosexual [1], we would only need to find space for 4.3 million people. Using Google Earth I was able to draw a scale diagram of the Bermuda Triangle [2]. We can see that the area bound by the Bermuda Triangle can be represented by an equilateral triangle of side = 1000 miles. Therefore, the area of the Bermuda Triangle is:

A = 0.5bh
A = 0.5 x 1000 x (SQRT[500^2 + 1000^2])
A = 559,017 mi^2

So, for our 4.3 million homosexuals, each one would have an area to him/herself of:

A = 4,300,000/559,017
A = 7.69 square miles/homosexual

This is obviously far from overcrowded.

"Not all homosexuals believe the Bermuda Triangle is a nice place. Not all homosexuals like nice things."

I ask my opponent for evidence that not all homosexuals believe the Bermuda Triangle to be a nice place, because I think that logic is impeccable. All homosexuals DO like nice things, I don't know where my opponent is getting his information. I contend that all homosexuals like nice things, and because the Bermuda Triangle area is nice, they would enjoy the move.

Let's just refresh here:

This is what homosexuals put up with in America: http://thedailybackground.com...
This is how they would live if they were all isolated at the Bermuda Triangle: http://www.ambushmag.com...

"This point is irrelevant. Some homosexuals do not enjoy water, it could be that most of them do not, for "liking" something is simply subjective. This is not even relevant to the topic at hand."

It is very relevant indeed and I fear my opponent just doesn't have a counter. It is relevant because I wouldn't want homosexuals to live in a place they didn't enjoy, but the plain fact is that all homosexuals do enjoy water, as the following images attest:

http://farm1.static.flickr.com...
http://www.gay-travelnet.com...
http://www.miami-info.com...

"What ways? My ways of wise judgement and acceptance? I would like to change your ways of ignorance."

It's ignorant to want better things for the homosexual community? You don't sound too accepting at all.

[1] - http://www.adherents.com...
[2] - http://www.debate.org...
Debate Round No. 2
studentathletechristian8

Con

studentathletechristian8 forfeited this round.
leet4A1

Pro

My opponent forfeited his third round argument, so I have nothing to rebut and all arguments are extended.
Debate Round No. 3
studentathletechristian8

Con

studentathletechristian8 forfeited this round.
leet4A1

Pro

Once again, my opponent forfeited. I have nothing left to rebut, and all of my arguments remain unchallenged. Vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 4
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by leet4A1 7 years ago
leet4A1
Not enough people voted. Also, I can't vote and obviously my opponent voted for himself despite forfeiting 2 rounds.
Posted by wjmelements 7 years ago
wjmelements
Why didn't pro win in a landslide?
Posted by Lightkeeper 7 years ago
Lightkeeper
LoL
Posted by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
Say what now?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by studentathletechristian8 7 years ago
studentathletechristian8
studentathletechristian8leet4A1Tied
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 
Vote Placed by Maikuru 7 years ago
Maikuru
studentathletechristian8leet4A1Tied
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:07