The Instigator
pappu
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
numa
Con (against)
Winning
20 Points

An eye for an eye will make the whole world blind

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/15/2008 Category: Society
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 4,923 times Debate No: 5022
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (2)
Votes (7)

 

pappu

Pro

An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind". Gandhi quote. The father of non-
violent resistance in the modern age, Mahatma Gandhi led a peaceful revolt that won India's independence from British colonial rule. His message of non-violent resistance is as timely today as it was 50 years ago.When someone commits a heinous crime, such as murder, he or she is usually sentenced to death. This is known as capital punishment or the death penalty. The death penalty has always been a very controversial subject.
numa

Con

the principle "an eye for an eye" refers to those who have committed a crime. so if someone committed a murder, their life should be taken as well to serve as equal and fair just punishment. well, so long as not EVERYONE commits a murder, then not everyone will "lose an eye" so to speak. meaning the whole world will not go blind. keep in mind that the death penalty and killing have been the only crimes introduced to warrant the usage of this term throughout the context of this debate. that said, back to pro...
Debate Round No. 1
pappu

Pro

"so long as not EVERYONE commits a murder, then not everyone will "lose an eye""
what if everyone does commit a murder? then you would agree that the whole world would go blind.
"keep in mind that the death penalty and killing have been the only crimes introduced to warrant the usage of this term"
if death penalty has been introduced for killing, then why isn't a rapist raped and torturer tortured. after all, the saying implies "an eye for an eye" which would mean direct retribution.
numa

Con

** what if everyone does commit a murder? then you would agree that the whole world would go blind. **

"what ifs" do not prove anything. in order for this point to be valid, you must prove that (there is at LEAST a likely chance that) everyone will commit a murder. the resolution does not suggest that everyone will commit a murder, and evaluation of both history and the current times indicates that most people do NOT commit murders. so this "what if" is incredibly far fetched and has absolutely no merit in this debate.

** after all, the saying implies "an eye for an eye" which would mean direct retribution **

the death penalty and capital punishment were the only crimes mentioned in round 1, which sets the tone for this debate and our discussion. further, even if i were to say "ok this terms means direct retribution for EVERY crime" (which i wouldn't), you would have to explain how the world will "go blind" if direct retribution were applied.
Debate Round No. 2
pappu

Pro

pappu forfeited this round.
numa

Con

numa forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
pappu

Pro

pappu forfeited this round.
numa

Con

after my opponent forfeited his last round, i chose to not respond, as he gave me nothing to respond to. once again, my opponent forfeited the final round, and still i have no rebuttal to refute. thus you should extend all of my arguments, and recognized that they have not been debated by pro. in that case, those pints are awarded to me and you should vote con on the basis that they were not proven untrue. remember that this is about what pro has contributed to the debate and not your own opinion. so, thanks for reading and see ya soon :)
Debate Round No. 4
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by LR4N6FTW4EVA 8 years ago
LR4N6FTW4EVA
You guys know what a figure of speech is, right?
Posted by bfitz1307 8 years ago
bfitz1307
Actually an eye for an eye, or murder for murder as suggested would leave all but one blind/murdered. Eventually it would come down to only two people and there would be no one left to murder the individual who committed the last murder. Just a thought :)
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Vi_Veri 7 years ago
Vi_Veri
pappunumaTied
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 chevy10294 8 years ago
chevy10294
pappunumaTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by emjayjohnson3279 8 years ago
emjayjohnson3279
pappunumaTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
pappunumaTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by apathy77 8 years ago
apathy77
pappunumaTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by ecstatica 8 years ago
ecstatica
pappunumaTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by numa 8 years ago
numa
pappunumaTied
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:03