Everyone should be treated equally.
Debate Rounds (5)
I am taking the stance that everyone should NOT be treated equally.
The layout of this debate is as follows:
R2- Opening Arguments
R4- Defense & Final Arguments
R5- Defense & Closing Statements
If anyone fails to follow this outline it is an automatic forfeit.
Sources do not have to be cited.
Forfeiture of a round because of time should not be held against the debater unless it is for the 3rd or 4th round.
More than 2 forfeitures should be counted against said person.
I do ask that my opponent takes this debate seriously and argue intelligently.
I will ask that those judging follow the voting system and not personal oppinion.
Thank you all, and good luck to my opponent.
Everyone: (pronoun) Every person
Treat: (verb) Behave toward or deal with in a certain way
Equally: (adverb) 1- In the same manner. 2- To the same extent or degree
I completely disagree that everyone should be treated equally. To be treated equally strips a person of their individuality and personal achievements. Certain individuals deserve to be recognized above others and also deserve to have their achievements awarded.
If everyone were treated equally then the rapist would be just as worthy of glory as the couple who is trying to fight world hunger, and the chef who spends his free time cooking for the homeless is no better than the murderer killing children in their own beds.
Equality is not as nice as it sounds. Equality doesn't guarantee that everyone is treated in a proper manner. Equality is a guarantee that everyone is treated in the same manner, whether it is good or bad. In order to have a society in which people agree that they are being treated fairly and properly there needs to be diversity in how these people are treated, which is to be in direct reflection to the actions of the individual. This is where the concept of Communism goes awry. If the lazy farmer gets paid just as much as the hard-working farmer, then why should the hard-working farmer put forth so much effort if it is not to be rewarded? When an individuals achievements are not recognized, then the individual stops trying to achieve. Eventually, these individuals produce the collective bare-minimum, and the total quality of life goes down.
Basically, total equality puts the entire strength of the rope at the weakest thread. Those that are stronger are not allowed to compensate because the weak thread cannot hold up to the same expectations. Equality isn't as good as it may seem to be.
You may do whatever you want, but if you look in the comments you will see why.
Long live the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant - today we targetted Paris because they targetted us.
Ad hominem :O I swear under Allah that I did not prompt such a blasphemous response from my opponent against the New prophet of Allah.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jonbonbon 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: Pro forfeited and made a completely out of place joke about the recent attack in France. Either one of those alone warrants awarding con with the conduct point. Con was the only one who provided an argument, because pro forfeited immediately after con posted. Therefore, con's arguments went unrefuted and were the only ones that could be considered in the end.
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.