The Instigator
TILR
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Wylted
Pro (for)
Winning
5 Points

Ban Books

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 3 votes the winner is...
Wylted
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/13/2015 Category: Education
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 465 times Debate No: 80898
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (3)

 

TILR

Con

I don"t think that books should be banned because you"re able to read what you"re interested in, you have more exposure to things, and there are more challenges.
Wylted

Pro

Some books absolutely should be banned. The NSA regularly looks over books, former staffers have written to insure that no classified information is accidently leaked out. On occasion the NSA must ban these books or sensitive information could get into the wrong hands, and endanger national security.
Debate Round No. 1
TILR

Con

If the NSA believes that books that don"t have any "classified" information in them should be banned then what is the reaon for that.
Wylted

Pro

"If the NSA believes that books that don"t have any "classified" information in them should be banned then what is the reaon for that."

This is not even comprehensible, nor is it an argument. I'm referring to a banning of books by former assets or employees, that could reveal serious security weaknesses that if exposed could put millions of lives at risk. It is certainly justifiable to ban a book that could get large numbers of people killed.
Debate Round No. 2
TILR

Con

TILR forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Bosoxfaninla 1 year ago
Bosoxfaninla
TILRWyltedTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: ff
Vote Placed by SirMaximus 1 year ago
SirMaximus
TILRWyltedTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had better conduct, because Con forfeited 1 round, but Pro didn't forfeit any rounds. I understood both of them pretty well, so they tie for spelling and grammar. Con made the valid argument that books shouldn't be banned, because you should be able to read what you're interested in. This is true, because if books that one is interested in are banned, then one won't be able to read those books, and their interests will be stifled. On the other hand, Pro made the valid argument that some books have classified information, and if they're not banned, then they could get into the wrong hands and endanger national security. After all, national security is very important, and some books do indeed contain classified information. Therefore, Pro and Con tie for convincing arguments. Neither of them used any sources, so they tie for reliable sources.
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 1 year ago
Ore_Ele
TILRWyltedTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: comical use of exception to exploit a poorly worded (or not worded at all) resolution. Con provided no counter and gave up.