DDO Should Remove the Instigator's Ability to Set an Age Minimum
Debate Rounds (5)
First round is acceptance.
People use this option expecting that his or her opponent would then be an intelligent, mature, or formal enough debator.
Just because someone is very young does not mean he or she lacks a lot of the skills a mature person has.
For instance, topics that describe sexual activity could arise a legal issue when involving a minor for pornographic text. If someone is debating the topic of sexual fetishes, they may include such language that would be considered pornographic and vulgar, inappropriate for minors to discuss.
My opponent states that a young person can be as skilled as an adult, which I agree with. I have a debate in which I argue for the opinions of minors to be taken seriously, however minors are not able to logically and intellectually debate on every topic.
"For instance, topics that describe sexual activity could arise a legal issue when involving a minor for pornographic text. If someone is debating the topic of sexual fetishes, they may include such language that would be considered pornographic and vulgar, inappropriate for minors to discuss."
Minors are still able to view those debates but not participate in them. Is that not the same amount of exposure to potential mature content?
"minors are not able to logically and intellectually debate on every topic."
Is that not a stereotype itself?
Not only are both my opponent's challenges unsupported and flawed, my opponent failed to provide any further evidence on their side. The first, and only argument, is age discrimination. There are perfectly justified instances where an instigator should be allowed to set an age minimum for their debate. Minors lack the life experience to provide intricate and well developed philosophical arguments. A minor is also more likely to take a personal offense due to the developing stages of the frontal lobe, which is responsible for emotional response.
My opponent has also lacked any substantial support for any arguments presented, merely personal bias opinion. In fact, my opponent has done nothing but state the very topic of their argument.
My opponent claims that I failed to bring up a supported argument against his point on pornographic content as well as his point on a minor's inability to debate every topic, and then attempts to clarify the points. However, I was asking him questions for clarification and flaws in his argument.
"My point on the vulgar material was that the pornographic content would be produced by a minor."
The instigator's ability to set an age minimum is for participation and not for viewing the debate. If it were gone, "minors" would be able to participate in possibly inappropriate debates for their age. However, Con has not pointed out a significant difference in the development of a child if he or she is participating in an inappropriate debate over only spectating one.
"My point on minors being unable to debate every topic is not a stereotype, but a fact of every human being. A mathematics teacher cannot argue the intricate mechanisms of neurological perception."
This topic is about people of various ages, not of various fields of knowledge. Hence, Con has brought up an unfitting analogy. Con has not proved here that a lower age lacks some sort of characteristic that allows someone to debate any topic. He has merely stated a claim again except worded differently.
"Minors lack the life experience to provide intricate and well developed philosophical arguments. "
The life experience needed to provide intricate and well developed philosophical arguments depends on one's education, work ethic, places he or she has been, and etc, which could be manipulated by the amount of time one has been living, but not will.
"A minor is also more likely to take a personal offense due to the developing stages of the frontal lobe, which is responsible for emotional response."
There is a big difference between more likely and will. For example, it is true that children born into households where parents fight a lot, are more likely to commit cyber-bullying in the future. However, it does not mean will, which is why there are no household tension questions being asked by social media systems to everyone who wants to create a social media account nor social media systems barring children who have belligerent parents from connecting with their friends on social media.
Overall, I applause my opponent for his great points -which I agree with. The main issue is simply that they are not supporting the claim that I am wrong.
bman7720 forfeited this round.
I am finished
bman7720 forfeited this round.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.