Emphasis In The Word "Bagel" Should Be Placed On The "A"
Debate Rounds (4)
Thanks in advance, SirPrinceAndrewIII :)
Remember to vote with me, for the little guy!
Again, Thanks in advance, SirPrinceAndrewIII
"The larger a language and the larger the vocabularies of the people who speak it, the smarter the people are as a whole."
First, I must ask Sir P. Andrew where this information came from. If this is truly a piece of linguistic neuroscience, then why is there no source? I believe this is a personal opinion and, therefore, logically unsound.
Aside from attacking my opponent's argumentative construction, I would also like to point out that the un-unified dialects are only hindering human progress and society. The soul of this argument isn't just about "baggel" and "baygel," rather the underlying existential philosophy of accents. Some are correct and some are incorrect. Just as books don't have spelling or syntactical errors, thanks to reference guilds like MLA, CMS, and APA, our speech must also have a correct and incorrect styles.
Lastly, I'd like to point out SirPrinceAndrewIII's political ideology. According to his profile page (as of 4:02 PM EST), he is an anarchist. This can also be seen in his opinion on bagels. In his last round he pointed out, "it's good to go against the grain and against those sacred [documents that keep humanity from collapsing into chaos]." Anarchists can be dangerous and harmful to society. As Thomas Paine once wrote, "society in every state is a blessing [and] government... is... necessary."
Thank you and remember: think of bagels not as "baggels," but rather "liberty baygels." BLESS AMERICA AND ITS SWEET MORNING BAKED GOODS!!!
And stop giving me all this garbage about logical fallacies. Geeze. You sound like a 10th grader in an Advanced English class.
Furthermore, the attack on my personal beliefs are an uncalled for cheap-shot, not to mention the disclaimer that I put in the about-me section. But... if we're going to play it that way... I would like to point out that nor is firmly a Socialist! It can be found in his Big Issues opinions. Nothing is more unamerican than Socialism, at least anarchism is consistent with America's long standing, "screw the man!!!" attitude. Socialism practically hops into bed with him! So how dare you say BLESS AMERICA you uncultured swine!
Now my fellow Americans, if you fear Socialism and its, "lets all be poor together" attitude, if you fear The Man and his control over your everyday life, VOTE bag-el, the true American way!
Thanks again, SirPrinceAndrewIII - a real American
Second, if you didn't want you personal beliefs attacked, you shouldn't have made an account on this website, where people argue over who's right and wrong. Suck it up.
I hate to play the fallacy card, but I find it irresistible. You committed the ad hominem fallacy. You are attacking me as a person and avoiding the actual topic. In your entire Round 3 Argument, you bring up bagels only once.
Your blatant emulation of Senator McCarthy from the 1950s is unbelievable. To those of you who do not know about this part of American history, Sen. Joseph McCarthy was a staunch anti-communist in the '50s who accused thousands of being communists. This ruined the careers and lives of the accused. Furthermore, I am not a communist. Socialism isn't nearly as radical and there are many countries today that prosper under socialist rule. This "SirPrinceAndrewIII" character is a dangerous man who, like McCarthy, claims socialists and other radicals cannot be true Americans. The United States of America were created for those who were persecuted and it doesn't make any sense to accuse those of having different ideas of being un-American. Socialists need not be fears, rather embraced and noted for their bravery and strong will.
To the bagel issue I say this: You have seen the arguments put forth by myself and my opponent. I believe that by following a universal English language dialect, we can overcome the problem, and people will eventually call bagels baygels instead of the baggels they aren't. I urge you, I beseech you, and beg of you: don't let the unsophisticated pronunciation of baggels uproot society like it has. If we work together as one nation, along with the help of the Anglophonic peoples the world over, we can stop the madness. Vote for the "baygels," to prove you are a true English speaker. Bless America and the English language, protect it from the foul and corrupt mispronouncers and keep the reference books sacred.
Thank you for your support and may the baygles prosper, nor87.
1. I didn't call Americans lazy. I have no idea where you got that.
2. What do my personal beliefs have to do with bagels? It was a cheap shot and you know it.
3. You say my argument doesn't bring up bagels? Look at yours! Your round four argument has nothing to do with the topic anymore you just went on a rant about some crazy senator from the fifties.
4. Socialist, Communist, potato, patato. And no, potato, potato will not be then next thing we're arguing about.
5. "socialists need not be fears" Bro, get your grammar right!
6. Bravery and strong will huh? How bout their skill at thievery? I mean, nobody else has figured out how to legally still millions from people.
7. Me unsophisticated? You were the one who brought up McCarthy in a discussion about bagels.
8. Again, how dare you say bless America, You Commie!
9. You want everyone to talk the same? What's next? should we all look the same too? Oh yeah, I forgot, we're all supposed to have the same amount of money: $0.
10. Fallacies? Me! Have you seen your arguments?
11. Everyone, please vote no if only for the fact that nor has clearly gone off his rocker in this last round and that the most sane debater deserves to win.
Remember to vote no :)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Lexus 1 year ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||4||0|
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - I give conduct to pro because throughout the debate con was generally rude and snippy ("you sound like a tenth grader", "uncultured swine", etc) | Arguments - pro gets arguments. Con often employed fallacious reasoning to prove their case ("it is good to go against the grain", yet not offering a reason or justification of this belief). Pro does make a good point, that *all* dictionaries made for the english language say 'bay-gel', and the hundreds of dictionaries cannot be wrong. | Additional comments - pro, NEVER cite a user's page ever again. Really, never. I participate in debates where I am the devil's advocate (mostly gay marriage debates), and if my opponent decided to cite my page as for a reason to not believe my claims, well that'd be a logical fallacy at it's very core.
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.