The Instigator
Lsumichiganfan
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
KpoopAndPee
Con (against)
Winning
28 Points

Gay marriage should stay legal in all 50 states

Do you like this debate?NoYes-4
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 10 votes the winner is...
KpoopAndPee
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/7/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,155 times Debate No: 77371
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (10)

 

Lsumichiganfan

Pro

Hello welcome to the debate! I would like to clarify that Con will be arguing that gay marriage should be illegal in all 50 states I will be arguing that it should stay legal in all 50 states. 1st round is acceptance only I look for a fair fun debate! Good luck to you! (You may use religious reasons for your con position)
KpoopAndPee

Con

My choice of to be anti of the marriage being allowed in the states is for a reason of course and I will explain that.

1. We should all respect the beliefs of a religion and if a religion believes that being gay is bad you can't change it. Because its their belief and you can do is bear it.

2. We all are allowed to state out our opinions and if not agreeing with allowing gay marriages is someone's opinion.

3. Some people from other generations aren't used to the gay marriages of course. That is explaining of a vote to 17 - 11. Most likely those 11 people are from an older generation. The other generation before us; if you were gay back then your parents would probably hire some christian worker to "get the gay out of you".

And those are my reasons why I don't agree with gay marriage to be allowed in the states.

Debate Round No. 1
Lsumichiganfan

Pro

***VIOLATION OF RULES*** IMMEDIATE FORFIT FOR THE REST OF THE DEBATE! Rule violated 1st round acceptance only.
KpoopAndPee

Con

Nah.. I won't forfeit. I would prefer to see you do it.
Debate Round No. 2
Lsumichiganfan

Pro

What it was a clear violation of rules. The voters will vote for me since you broke a rule
KpoopAndPee

Con

Sure they can do that. Let's see if they would even care. If I am wrong oh well. You didn't win the debate, you ended it. So CONGRATS!
Debate Round No. 3
Lsumichiganfan

Pro

How did I end it? You broke a rule which I stated in the 1st round.
KpoopAndPee

Con

I'm saying when it comes down to when you get more votes I wouldn't my self say you won it. My opinion.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by famousdebater 1 year ago
famousdebater
lol
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
==================================================================
>Reported vote: Eli01// Mod action: Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments), 1 point to Pro (Conduct). Reasons for voting decision: CON is the only one who gave an argument.

[*Reason for removal*] Makes no mention of anything that happened in the debate (Pro saying that the first round of the debate was for acceptance, Con posting arguments and Pro arguing a rule violation). Voters should take a position on the theory of the debate, explain it, and award points accordingly.
===========================================================================
Posted by bballcrook21 1 year ago
bballcrook21
Of course the supporter of a lying mindless hosebeast like Hillary Clinton would appeal to the votes for sympathetic help.
Posted by Commondebator 1 year ago
Commondebator
looking over my comment, I realized i have now contradicted myself.
Posted by Commondebator 1 year ago
Commondebator
dis wuz stoopid

What a waste of keyboard typing

u couldve used that those typing skillz to do something more productive like brain surgery
Posted by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 1 year ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
==================================================================
>Reported vote: magic123// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Pro never stated any reason gay marriage should be legal.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) No explanation for any points awarded. Makes no mention of anything that happened in the debate (Pro saying that the first round of the debate was for acceptance, Con posting arguments and Pro arguing a rule violation). Voters should take a position on the debate, and explaining why they are awarding the points they are awarding.
===========================================================================
Posted by Lsumichiganfan 1 year ago
Lsumichiganfan
You all may find this amusing but I am sorry for what I said earlier and what I called the debate.orgs voting process disgusting. I realise what I've done now. But please don't say rude things to me in the comment section anymore. I look for more apology's from the people that commented.
Posted by cathaystewie 1 year ago
cathaystewie
@KroneckerDelta On second thought, I put the conduct vote down as a tie. CON was indeed violating the first round acceptance rule, but PRO never declared in the first round that violation of any rules by the opposition would warrant an automatic win for him/her, or that the opponent had to forfeit as a result of the violation. But thank you for your insight!
Posted by KroneckerDelta 1 year ago
KroneckerDelta
@cathaystewie I actually strongly disagree with the votes on conduct for PRO. I think the conduct of PRO was very inappropriate. In fact, if you want to be extremely strict, then PRO presented an argument that CON never refuted (i.e. that CON broke a rule of the debate). So actually, if you honestly think conduct should go to PRO rather than CON, then you should also vote for PRO on arguments. I disagreed with that argument, however, because I don't think CON broke any rule and thus I thought that PROs accusation that CON broke a rule was misconduct.
Posted by KroneckerDelta 1 year ago
KroneckerDelta
@Lsumichiganfan "I could have argued give me a break!", "...what else was I supposed to do?", "He broke a rule he loses was I supposed to sit there and keep arguing?"

So what else could you have done? ARGUE...it's not complicated--start debating!!! This pretty much answers all of your questions. And as for your statement that "...the voters should know that the violation of any rule would be decided by the creator of the debate.", I completely disagree with that because if that were the case then any instigator could make up any arbitrary rules which would allow the instigator to win any debate on a technicality based on "rules" proposed by the instigator.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Siladheil 1 year ago
Siladheil
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: I was looking forward to seeing this debate unfold. Although Con posted an argument in the first round. I would have liked to have seen Pro roll with it instead of give up. Since Con's arguments were the only ones presented, they stand unchallenged. Neither side posted sources and S&G was even throughout.
Vote Placed by bballcrook21 1 year ago
bballcrook21
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I agree with Con before and after the debate. Pro had lots of grammar mistakes and acted very childish, especially because he used caps lock and told Con to "FORFIT" (it's spelled forfeit by the way).
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:23 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct, Goes to Pro for Con breaking the rules. S&G goes to Pro due to Con's inproper grammar for his use of Dependent clauses without an independent clauses and use of fragmented sentences. Arguments, however, I still have to give to Con for actually arguing in this debate. I cannot give all 7 points to Pro due to him not actually giving a punishment for the violations.
Vote Placed by SirMaximus 1 year ago
SirMaximus
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Before the debate, I agreed with Pro that same-sex marriage should stay legal in all 50 states in the US. Now, after the debate, I still agree with Pro, because while Con had good arguments, I have my own reasons to disagree with Con's arguments. (I'll explain this soon.) Pro and Con tie for conduct, because Pro decided to not make any arguments just because Con broke a rule, but Con broke the rule that the first round was only for acceptance. I counted 2 spelling and grammar mistakes made by Pro, and 2 made by Con, so that's a tie. Con made more convincing arguments, because Con actually made arguments, and Pro didn't make any arguments. Neither of them used any sources, so they tie for reliable sources.
Vote Placed by salam.morcos 1 year ago
salam.morcos
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: What a waste! Pro stated that the first round is for acceptance only. The instigator has the right to set the rules, and if they other debater doesn't conform to it, then it warrants a loss. At the same time, these rules are generally meant to be as "guidelines". What Pro should have done is this: "Con you violated the rules, you should waive your Round 2, or this would merit a loss." This debate is therefore a tie. No one deserves to get a point.
Vote Placed by KroneckerDelta 1 year ago
KroneckerDelta
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: I am changing my vote altogether now. I am still giving conduct to CON because I think it was inappropriate for PRO to accuse CON of forfeiting the debate because of a technicality (a technicality that I don't think changed the debate, i.e. whether or not gay marriage should be legal in all 50 states). However, I cannot give arguments to CON because PRO stated that Round 1 was only for acceptance. Therefore CON, effectively, made no arguments (thus I cannot give arguments to anyone). The next question is whether or not I should vote for arguments for PRO based on their assertion that CON forfeited the debate by presenting arguments in Round 1. 1) this was not explicitly stated by PRO: "Rule violated 1st round acceptance only.", but HOW was it violated? and 2) I disagree, as a judge, that CON presented arguments in Round 1; had CON pointed this out, I would be voting for CON instead of PRO, but the case is that CON didn't refute PRO's assertion and thus it's a tie.
Vote Placed by cathaystewie 1 year ago
cathaystewie
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: CON was indeed in violation of the 'first round acceptance' rule, but PRO didn't specify that he/she had the authority to demand forfeiture nor did he/she assert the rule that any violation of rules by one side grants the other side an automatic victory. CON was the only one to put forward arguments that were relevant to the motion and all arguments stood with no resistance from PRO, thus arguments go to CON.
Vote Placed by evanjfarrar 1 year ago
evanjfarrar
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: The automatic forfeit was never specified in the opening round, and although Con did violate the rules, Pro did not present any arguments, which he/she could have easily done. Con's conduct was defiant and frankly rude, so conduct goes to Pro. This was a silly debate, and I recommend redoing it.
Vote Placed by tajshar2k 1 year ago
tajshar2k
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro, you could have argued, instead you kept blabbering about how he violated your rule. You never stated in round 1 that Rule 1 would result in violation of conduct, so its unfair for you to tell Con to forfeit. Con really was the only one who gave arguments. So arguments to Con.
Vote Placed by Commondebator 1 year ago
Commondebator
LsumichiganfanKpoopAndPeeTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: This was stupid. Conduct goes to pro because con broke the rules. However, pro didn't even provide any arguments. Pro never said "automatic loss if any rules broken", and not accepting a round does not count as a full on loss.