The Instigator
Daktoria
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
Randizzle4545
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Ending the War on Drugs Would Discriminate Against Sensitive Personalities

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/16/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,001 times Debate No: 31314
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (6)
Votes (0)

 

Daktoria

Con

This is a reverse debate. Con will take the side of an insensitive personality who is not vulnerable to addiction. Pro will take the side of a sensitive personality who is vulnerable to addiction.

It is indisputably assumed that Con and Pro agree that the War on Drugs should end.

For Con to win, Con must humiliate Pro into admitting to be a second class citizen. That is Pro must deal with fellow citizens using drugs in society despite how sensitive personalities cannot use drugs without becoming addicted. This means sensitive personalities must pay biased taxes and adhere to a biased rule of law.

For Pro to win, Pro must stand up for oneself and prove that equal social status still exists. That is despite how Pro cannot use drugs without becoming addicted, tax policy and the rule of law still respect who Pro is. This is even though taxes will be used to accommodate drug users, and drug users will be equally policed over.

First round is acceptance. Final round is rebuttal only.
Randizzle4545

Pro

This agreement is stupid it's a pointless agreement to make and no body even cares so stop posting lol
Debate Round No. 1
Daktoria

Con

My opponent has admitted to being pointless and doesn't believe anyone cares about the issue.

Vote Con.
Randizzle4545

Pro

You know this is completely a waiste of time and a minor argument why don't you make a better debate and not base It on opinion but fact
Debate Round No. 2
Daktoria

Con

My opponent admits to wasting time, isn't willing to stay on topic in this debate, and doesn't understand the fact-value distinction. Instead, he only believes in facts and opinions: http://en.wikipedia.org...

Please vote con.
Randizzle4545

Pro

Randizzle4545 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Randizzle4545

Pro

Randizzle4545 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Daktoria

Con

Daktoria forfeited this round.
Randizzle4545

Pro

Randizzle4545 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by Randizzle4545 4 years ago
Randizzle4545
Exactly lol this agreement is pointless I accepted the challenge so no one else had to he has no idea what he's talking about and is clueless on the debate of drugs
Posted by toolpot462 4 years ago
toolpot462
I'm not convinced you know what you're talking about.
Posted by Daktoria 4 years ago
Daktoria
What does quantity of taxes have to do with anything? I'm talking about due process.
Posted by toolpot462 4 years ago
toolpot462
You wouldn't be paying more taxes for drug users, you'd be paying less taxes for law enforcement.
Posted by Daktoria 4 years ago
Daktoria
I mean sensitive personalities will be forced to pay taxes for behaviors they can't participate in without becoming mentally incapacitated.
Posted by toolpot462 4 years ago
toolpot462
What do you mean, "taxes will be used to accommodate drug users"?
No votes have been placed for this debate.