The Instigator
HoosierPapi
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Lightkeeper
Pro (for)
Winning
21 Points

Cancer

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
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: 9/18/2008 Category: Health
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,650 times Debate No: 5444
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (3)

 

HoosierPapi

Con

Numerous cigarette manufacturers and tobacco companies still, at least in subversive ways via disinformative advertising campaigns, claim that cigarettes to not cause cancer. There are also scientists who claim that tobacco does not definitively cause cancer.

I say, bullsh*t! It is up to my opponent to explain how cigarettes do not cause cancer.
Lightkeeper

Pro

The challenge in the present debate is to explain to my opponent how cigarettes do not cause cancer.

I therefore now assert that cigarettes do not cause cancer in the following ways:

1. by being produced
2. by being sold
3. by being bought
4. by being collected
5. by being traded for other goods or services
6. by being looked at
7. by being stepped on
8. by being sent into outer space
9. by being thrown in the gutter
10. by being burnt, with the exception of those rare occasions where a person (or animal) ends up inhaling some of the fumes emmitted in the process, in which case cigarette use can (according to some available evidence) lead to increased chances od contracting cancer.

I trust this answers my opponent's question. Please note that the question never did ask for an exhaustive list of all the possible ways of how cigarettes do not cause cancer. However, if requested to do so, I will be happy to come up with more.

Over to you
Debate Round No. 1
HoosierPapi

Con

HoosierPapi forfeited this round.
Lightkeeper

Pro

Lightkeeper forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
HoosierPapi

Con

HoosierPapi forfeited this round.
Lightkeeper

Pro

Ladies and Gentlement,
We have now come to the final round of this debate and I (being the respondent) have the last say.
In the opening round, my opponent has challenged me to show him how cigaretts do not cause cancer.
I have done just that. I have showed him a number of ways in which cigarettes do not cause cancer.
He has declined to reply to my argument. I will go further and say that he has declined to reply to a number of arguments in a number of debates. In fact, he has not logged into this site for a week.
Some of you might think to yourselves "this Lightkeeper guy is being cheeky, everyone knows the initiator's contention was that cigrette smoking causes cancer".
I will say you don't know what his contention was. You can't know what he had in mind. What he said in his resolution is "I say, bullsh*t! It is up to my opponent to explain how cigarettes do not cause cancer."
And that was the last we heard from him.
Am I pro-cancer? No.
Do I suggest that cigarette smoking doesn't cause cancer? No.
Do I oppose the contention that cigarettes cause cancer? Yes, of course I do.
Cigarettes are inanimate objects. Ones that do not radiate any harmful energy (well, no scientist has suggested they do, to my knowledge).
A cigarette can do you no wrong unless you light it up and inhale its fumes. Once you do that, you may have an increased risk of contracting cancer. However, my opponent has not provided any evidence even for that contention.

As voters, you should judge a debate on its merits. You should not look for evidence outside of the debate.

I contend that I have answered my opponent's question and met no rebuttal. I therefore ask that you vote Pro.

Please note: this does not mean I am Pro Cancer. This also does not mean that I believe that cigarette smoking does not increase one's chances of contracting cancer.

Ladies and Gentlemen, the case is now with you.

Thank you
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
I like :P I very like XD
Posted by JBlake 9 years ago
JBlake
My vote goes Pro, for obvious reasons.
Posted by JBlake 9 years ago
JBlake
Good argument, by the way.
Posted by JBlake 9 years ago
JBlake
Lightkkeeper is Pro-Cancer?
Posted by Lightkeeper 9 years ago
Lightkeeper
LOL
Just for the record, I posted my argument AFTER LR4 posted the "lame semantics" comment. His comment was not about my argument.
Also, I'm not arguing semantics. I addressed the proposition by answering the question directly, ie "how cigarettes do not cause cancer".
My opponet is forfeiting these rounds but not because he doesn't like my argument. Rather, my opponent has gone AWOL and hasn't been online for a week. He has forfeited rounds in other debates.
Posted by burningpuppies101 9 years ago
burningpuppies101
yea.... i'm with LR4N6FT on this one, but Lightkeeper gave a good argument. Quick question for LR4N, where did you get your username, and how do you remember it?
Posted by LR4N6FTW4EVA 9 years ago
LR4N6FTW4EVA
I could run a really lame semantics against this one. Think people kill, not guns.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
HoosierPapiLightkeeperTied
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 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
HoosierPapiLightkeeperTied
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:07 
Vote Placed by JBlake 9 years ago
JBlake
HoosierPapiLightkeeperTied
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