The Instigator
Gotid24
Pro (for)
Losing
11 Points
The Contender
beem0r
Con (against)
Winning
71 Points

God is against gay marriage. God hates homosexuals. According to god, they should be put to death.

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/30/2007 Category: Religion
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 6,343 times Debate No: 1155
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (21)
Votes (24)

 

Gotid24

Pro

According to the believers of god and the "holy" bible, homosexuality is not only consider something bad but it's also considered a deadly sin. According to the bible, "If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. -- Lev.20:13. Would you kill a gay person for being gay? According to god, you should.
Leviticus is not the only book in the bible that deal with homosexuality. Here's another, "And Noah awoke from his wine, and knew what his younger son had done unto him."
What did Ham do? Did he just look at his naked father or was there something more to it than that? Some commentators have suggested that Ham committed homosexual rape on his drunken father, and that this was why Ham's descendants were eternally punished with slavery. Genesis 9:24
Wow according to this story Noah was raped by his gay son, and all his descendants were punished with slavery (Yes slavery, this is also another thing god supports, he is also against women's right, but this is another argument).
It seems that god want us to either just kill homosexuals or just make them slaves, all according to the bible.
beem0r

Con

First, you cite Leviticus:
"If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them." - Lev 20:13

However, you fail to recognize that this was simply a law enacted by man to discourage homosexuality and encourage growth of society through reproduction. While some might argue that the bible is the infallible word of god, this is simply not the case. God did not dictate the entire bible to its authors, nor did he give his stamp of approval to each verse within.

So rather, according to some authors of the bible, homosexuality should have been at the time punishable by death.

Also, you are merely speculating, or rather stealing the speculations of others, with regards to what happened between Noah and Ham. Seriously, get your mind out of the gutter, man! ;)

Also, if rape was in fact what Noah was speaking of that Ham had done to him, why would we assume that homosexuality was the reason it was wrong? Are there not two other things, both widely regarded as immoral even today, that would be possible reasons? In case you need help on what I mean, rape and incest.

You didn't make any points about the "God is against gay marriage" claim, so I'll wait until you do to address it.

Also, he clearly never states that he hates homosexuals. God loves everyone. He doesn't hate sinners, no matter how bad a sin they've committed. So even if he did approve that message in Leviticus, he still loves homosexuals. He just has unorthodox ways of showing his love. ;)

I look forward to the rest of the debate.
Debate Round No. 1
Gotid24

Pro

You said:"However, you fail to recognize that this was simply a law enacted by man to discourage homosexuality and encourage growth of society through reproduction. While some might argue that the bible is the infallible word of god, this is simply not the case. God did not dictate the entire bible to its authors, nor did he give his stamp of approval to each verse within."
Well I thought that the bible is the word of god. So please let the believers know that the book that they follow and live for, is not really the book of god. So please dont say is not literally the words of god, because to believers thats what they believe.
I didnt have to make any other point that god was against gay marriage because according to "god", any homosexuality should be punished to death, that include gay marriage.
These are two more verses on how god hates homosexuality. Found in Leviticus
Homosexual acts are an abomination to God. 18:22
If a man has sex with another man, kill them both. 20:13

You said that god loves everyone, well according to the bible he doesnt, please prove me other wise. According to this all loving god, we should kill other human beings, women should be property of men, slavery is ok if the slaves come from other nations.
Well these are a few of the many verses in the bible that proof that god is not as loving as everybody thinks he is. well enjoy them, hope to hear from you soon.
Genesis
Because God liked Abel's animal sacrifice more than Cain's vegetables, Cain kills his brother Abel in a fit of religious jealousy. 4:8

God is angry. He decides to destroy all humans, beasts, creeping things, fowls, and "all flesh wherein there is breath of life." He plans to drown them all. 6:7, 17

God repeats his intention to kill "every living substance ... from off the face of the earth." But why does God kill all the innocent animals? What had they done to deserve his wrath? It seems God never gets his fill of tormenting animals. 7:4

God drowns everything that breathes air. From newborn babies to koala bears -- all creatures great and small, the Lord God drowned them all. 7:21-23

God tells Abram to kill some animals for him. The needless slaughter makes God feel better. 15:9-10

Hagar conceives, making Sarai jealous. Abram tells Sarai to do to Hagar whatever she wants. "And when Sarai dealt hardly with her, she fled." 16:6

Lot refuses to give up his angels to the perverted mob, offering his two "virgin daughters" instead. He tells the bunch of angel rapers to "do unto them [his daughters] as is good in your eyes." This is the same man that is called "just" and "righteous" in 2 Peter 2:7-8. 19:7-8

God kills everyone (men, women, children, infants, newborns) in Sodom and Gomorrah by raining "fire and brimstone from the Lord out of heaven." Well, almost everyone -- he spares the "just and righteous" Lot and his family. 19:24

Lot's nameless wife looks back, and God turns her into a pillar of salt. 19:26

God threatens to kill Abimelech and his people for believing Abe's lie. 20:3-7

Sarai tells Abraham to "cast out this bondwoman and her son." God commands him to "hearken unto her voice." So Abraham abandons Hagar and Ishmael, casting them out into the wilderness to die. 21:10-14

God orders Abraham to kill Isaac as a burnt offering. Abraham shows his love for God by his willingness to murder his son. But finally, just before Isaac's throat is slit, God provides a goat to kill instead. 22:2-13

Abraham shows his willingness to kill his son for God. Only an evil God would ask a father to do that; only a bad father would be willing to do it. 22:10

Dinah, the daughter of Jacob, is "defiled" by a man who seems to love her dearly. Her brothers trick all of the men of the town and kill them (after first having them all circumcised), and then take their wives and children captive. 34:1-31

"The terror of God was upon the cities that were round about them." 35:5

"And Er, Judah's firstborn, was wicked in the sight of the Lord; and the Lord slew him." What did Er do to elicit God's wrath? The Bible doesn't say. Maybe he picked up some sticks on Saturday. 38:7

After God killed Er, Judah tells Onan to "go in unto they brother's wife." But "Onan knew that the seed should not be his; and ... when he went in unto his brother's wife ... he spilled it on the ground.... And the thing which he did displeased the Lord; wherefore he slew him also." This lovely Bible story is seldom read in Sunday School, but it is the basis of many Christian doctrines, including the condemnation of both masturbation and birth control. 38:8-10

After Judah pays Tamar for her services, he is told that she "played the harlot" and "is with child by whoredom." When Judah hears this, he says, "Bring her forth, and let her be burnt." 38:24

Joseph interprets the baker's dream. He says that the pharaoh will cut off the baker's head, and hang his headless body on a tree for the birds to eat. 40:19
Exodus

Moses murders an Egyptian after making sure that no one is looking. 2:11-12

God threatens to kill the Pharaoh's firstborn son. 4:23

God decides to kill Moses because his son had not yet been circumcised. 4:24-26

God will make sure that Pharaoh does not listen to Moses, so that he can kill Egyptians with his armies. 7:4

"And the Egyptians shall know that I am the LORD." Who else could be so cruel and unjust? 7:5, 17

God tells Moses and Aaron to smite the river and turn it into blood. 7:17-24

The fifth plague: all cattle in Egypt die. 9:2-6

The sixth plague: boils and blains upon man and beast. 9:9-12

"For I will at this time send all my plagues upon thine heart, and upon thy servants, and upon thy people; that thou mayest know that there is none like me in all the earth." Who else but the biblical god could be so cruel? 9:14

The seventh plague is hail. "And the hail smote throughout the land of Egypt all that was in the field, both man and beast." 9:22-25

These verses clearly show that the mass murder of innocent children by God was premeditated. 11:4-6 (see 12:29-30)

God will kill the Egyptian children to show that he puts "a difference between the Egyptians and Israel." 11:7

God explains to Moses that he intends to "smite all the firstborn in the land of Egypt, both man and beast. 12:12

After God has sufficiently hardened the Pharaoh's heart, he kills all the firstborn Egyptian children. When he was finished "there was not a house where there was not one dead." Finally, he runs out of little babies to kill, so he slaughters the firstborn cattle, too. 12:29

To commemorate the divine massacre of the Egyptian children, Moses instructs the Israelites to "sacrifice to the Lord all that openeth the matrix" -- all the males, that is. God has no use for dead, burnt female bodies. 13:2, 12, 15

After hardening Pharaoh's heart a few more times, God drowns Pharaoh's army in the sea 14:4-28

Moses and the people sing praises to their murderous god. 15:1-19

"The Lord is a man of war." Indeed, judging from his acts in the Old Testament, he is a vicious warlike monster. 15:3

God's right hand dashes people in pieces. 15:6

If you do what God says, he won't send his diseases on you (like he did to the Egyptians). But otherwise.... 15:26

Joshua, with God's approval, kills the Amalekites "with the edge of the sword." 17:13

"The Lord has sworn [God swears!] that the Lord will have war with Amalek from generation to generation." 17:14-16

Any person or animal that touches Mt. Sinai shall be stoned to death or "shot through." 19:12-13

Like the great and powerful Wizard of Oz, nobody can see God and live. 19:21

God gives instructions for killing and burning animals. He says that if we will make such "burnt offerings," he will bless us for it. What kind of mind would be pleased by the killing and burning of innocent animals? 20:24
beem0r

Con

>>Well I thought that the bible is the word of god.<<
It contains the word of God, but it is not solely the word of God. Only fundamentalists will tell you that every word in the bible was spoken from God, and they are the minority of the Christian religion, and not the side I'm arguing for. God allowed people to add what they though necessary, whether it be a story of creation (God didn't happen to tell people how he created the universe, so they had to make something up since that's expected info in a holy book), or manmade laws (God gives mankind most of the control on what goes on here on earth). God does not need to punish people here on earth, since he can justly reward or punish accordingly once we die. However, he knew that people would respect the human authority's laws more if they were written in the bible, so he did not stop them from adding whatever laws they felt necessary.

>>So please dont say is not literally the words of god, because to believers thats what they believe.<<
Whatever people do believe this (fundies) are wrong. Unless you're willing to argue for the biblical story of creation or a literally 'worldwide' flood, accept that if the bible is the word of god, it is not word for word truth.

>>Homosexual acts are an abomination to God. 18:22<<
http://www.biblegateway.com...;
No mention of god. any translation that includes god there is falsely translating. Again, this is a statement written by a human author.

>>If a man has sex with another man, kill them both. 20:13<<
A human law.

>>You said that god loves everyone, well according to the bible he doesnt, please prove me other wise.<<
He never says he dislikes anyone, and he promotes the idea of loving everyone. I find it therefore likely that he himself loves everyone. You are the one making a claim that he 'hates' homosexuals, when he never says so. So please, _prove yourself right_.

>>According to this all loving god, we should kill other human beings, women should be property of men, slavery is ok if the slaves come from other nations.<<
Some of that is human law, none of that shows that god does not love us.

An now for your bible verses, very few of which are relevant in the least to the topic at hand:

>>Genesis 4:8<<
God's not even the one doing the killing here. You can do better. This shows nothing bad of God.

>>Genesis 6:7, 17<<
If at first you don't succeed, try try again. Also, he didn't literally kill off everything, the authors just wanted to make it sound more badass. Even if he did though, have you never thrown something away that you cared about? Also, since our lives don't end when we die, he is committing no injustice towards us. we simply reach the afterlife as we normally would, to be judged fairly by God.

>>Genesis 7:4<<
Maybe it's fun for him, like hunting is for us. You never know. Either way, it's irrelevant to the debate topic.

>>Genesis 7:21-23<<
Already explained this, see 6:7, 17.

>>Genesis 15:9-10<<
Needless? If God wanted it, it was not needless. If killing an ant made you happy, you would hopefully do it. God's happiness is worth more than an insignificant mortal life.

>>Genesis 16:6<<
No mention of God. Abraham was not supposed to be perfect, neither was Sarai.

>>Lot offering his two daughters<<
Lot was a good person. Perhaps this was not his best act, but it is not too hard to explain. First, he was valuing God's angels above the lives of his daughters. It was out of love for God and his angels that Lot was willing to make such a sacrifice. Also, he did not urge them to rape his daughters: in fact, he urged them to do what they thought was good. Perhaps Lot was simply aloof, not realizing that the mob probably would have seen it fit to rape his daughters. Either way, people make mistakes.

>>Genesis 19:24<<
God slew the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah as a message to humanity. It is obvious that the inhabitants of Sodom and Gomorrah were largely immoral and a threat to human society. From the previous verse we see that they formed a mob with the intent to rape Lot's guests! He knew that humanity would not be able to cure itself of this infection on its own, so he took matters in his own hands.

>>Genesis 19:26<<
She was warned. She openly disobeyed God, and this was the only way for God to show Lot that she too should have been left behind, without Lot harboring any anger towards God for it.

>>Genesis 20:3-7<<
Sometimes threats are needed to get results. He simply was asking that he return his wife to her real husband. He did, so God didn't have to kill him for disobeying.

>>Genesis 21:10-14<<
He doesn't send them out to die, he is in fact guaranteed by God that Ishmael will father a nation.

>>Genesis 22:2-13<<
God was simply testing Abraham. He would not have let Abraham actually kill his son, he simply needed Abraham to realize that God was more important than anything in the world.
Also, you say only an evil god would ask such a thing - you are wrong. There is nothing wrong with what God did. He did not force a man to kill his own son, nor would he have let him. Also, Abraham was not a bad father, he was just more devoted to God than he was to his son.

>>Genesis 34:1-31<<
No mention of God.

>>Genesis 35:5<<
Sounds spooky. Without context, I'm not going to address it, since that statement says nothing in itself. Terror is not always evil.

>>Genesis 38:7<<
If the bible doesn't say, why do you expect me to know?

>>Genesis 38:8-10<<
He slew Onan for disobeying him. God told him _specifically_ to have a kid. http://www.biblegateway.com...;

>>Genesis 38:24<<
No mention of god. If you're going to use Skeptic's Annotated Bible, at least just take the relevant stuff. And you're copying directly from it. Don't have an argument of your own? Just throw a bunch of irrelevant verses from SAB at me!

>>Genesis 40:19<<
Same as above.

After realizing how irrelevant those Genesis quotes were, as well as the fact that you didn't do any thinking on your own and just used the Skeptics Annotated Bible, I'm not going to address the Exodus quotes. Next time, don't throw irrelevant garbage at me, it only wastes my time and that of the readers.
Debate Round No. 2
Gotid24

Pro

----God does not need to punish people here on earth, since he can justly reward or punish accordingly once we die. However, he knew that people would respect the human authority's laws more if they were written in the bible, so he did not stop them from adding whatever laws they felt necessary-----
Aren't you also assuming god's will. The same way they make up their lies about their fantasy gods, is the same way you are making up lies and attributing false attribution to a god that their is no empirical evidence for. The same we cant prove or disprove the existence of (pink unicorns, santa claus, and the smurfs), is the same way that you cant prove or disprove your
god. How can you prove something that doesn't exist. Why are you assuming that there is a life after this one on earth, and that we will be punish after we die? How can you prove that god will do this after you die? Please dont use the bible because cant pick and choose which verses of the bible are from god. If cant accept these verses as the word of god, ("If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. -- Lev.20:13), then you can not use any other from the bible because then the words of god will be open to interpretation. If god is god should his words not require any interpretation, because if they are truly from god, we should all be able to understand them. Is god all perfect then why does he need his creation to add on to the laws he created?? This doesn't sound like a supreme being, its sounds like a manager at McDonald's.

---Whatever people do believe this (fundies) are wrong. Unless you're willing to argue for the biblical story of creation or a literally 'worldwide' flood, accept that if the bible is the word of god, it is not word for word truth----
I'm not sure what your trying to say. I would argue against the all the biblical stories including jesus, because none of those stories resemble reality, biblical stories are fantasy stories rather than non fictional stories. No world wide flood can be created by 40 days of rain, that is impossible. But a world wide flood can take place if our earth is hit by a meteor, and that would only take a few hours to take place.

-----He never says he dislikes anyone, and he promotes the idea of loving everyone. I find it therefore likely that he himself loves everyone. You are the one making a claim that he 'hates' homosexuals, when he never says so. So please, _prove yourself right_.----
What the hell? In the old testament god says kill anyone that is gay because this is seeing as a act against god. The bible is the word of god, BELIEVERS BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE DIRECTLY FROM GOD. How can you say is not, that is the only source believer have of god. And i know that is not empirical evidence because it requires you to believes in it to think its true. Its like me proclaiming that Harry Potter is real and that the prove to his existence are his books. I know it sounds crazy but that is the same way religious people sound to me, crazy. What god love are you talking about? I believe in peace my friend but i believe in human love. I dont fear of god to prevent me from killing another man, as a human that loves life, i wouldn't kill another man. Its common sense, it is not a moral from god. Please prove to me this love. Please dont say the Jesus is prove of his love because this is a false claim. When someone sacrifices something, one sacrifices that thing forever, that is why the sacrifice is meaningful. What happened after Jesus die? He went back to his father, what kind of sacrifices is that? He got his son back?
beem0r

Con

>>Aren't you also assuming god's will. The same way they make up their lies about their fantasy gods, is the same way you are making up lies and attributing false attribution to a god that their is no empirical evidence for.<<
For you to think this is about evidence is foolish of you. Our entire topic is void of any evidence. For you to expect it from me is hypocritical. I am simply arguing from the standpoint of a moderate Christian. You did not state that the bible was to be taken word for word as divine truth, so I have no obligation to do so, especially when I am making arguments many Christians would be able and ready to make.

>>If cant accept these verses as the word of god, ("If a man also lie with mankind, as he lieth with a woman, both of them have committed an abomination: they shall surely be put to death; their blood shall be upon them. -- Lev.20:13), then you can not use any other from the bible because then the words of god will be open to interpretation.<<
They are open to interpretation. God does not necessarily want us to all thoroughly understand his word.

>>This doesn't sound like a supreme being, its sounds like a manager at McDonald's.<<
And you happen to know what DOES sound like a supreme being? You're making some baseless assertion that a supreme being would want X or Y, when you truly have no clue.

>>I would argue against the all the biblical stories including jesus, because none of those stories resemble reality, biblical stories are fantasy stories rather than non fictional stories.<<
Then you to agree that God doesn't disapprove of gay marriage, hate homosexuals, or think they should be put to death, since you don't even think he exists. For this argument, we're assuming that Christianity is the true religion - it doesn't make any sense for us to debate this in any other context.

>>In the old testament god says kill anyone that is gay because this is seeing as a act against god.<<
No. Nowhere in the bible does it say anything remotely like that.

>>The bible is the word of god, BELIEVERS BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE DIRECTLY FROM GOD.<<
Some believers do believe that every word is correct and from god. These are called fundamentalists, and they are wrong.

>>What god love are you talking about?<<
The love of the hypothetical Christian God who we're assuming exists for this debate. You know, the one who you say hates gays so much. I mean, if you're admitting that he doesn't exist, then you pretty much automatically lose, since a nonexistent thing has no feelings on anything.

>>When someone sacrifices something, one sacrifices that thing forever, that is why the sacrifice is meaningful. What happened after Jesus die? He went back to his father, what kind of sacrifices is that? He got his son back?<<
One could make a sacrifice by taking his/her co-worker's extra shift so the coworker doesn't lose his/her job. Sacrifices don't need to be permanent.

I have refuted all of your claims. Your weak case diverged into an attack on religion as a whole. Not only did I defeat you, you defeated yourself by claiming that there was no God. If there is no God, then surely God has no feelings on homosexuality.
Debate Round No. 3
21 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Tanniapc98 1 year ago
Tanniapc98
GOD IS GOD OF LOVE! He loves us before anything even if we sin. He hates the sin, but love us the sinners. Sin brings bad consquences, so God clearly says what is sinful in his word which is written by people who were his sons and were inspired by him. He wishes that all bad things didn't happen to us, but we choose sin and conmeend ourselves and this world. Thats why he send his only son Christ to die in the cross. Now we can be God's sons and be saved. He cleans us and changes us little by little only if we devote our lives to him. And he will change all those feelings and bad things we have in our heart.
Posted by beem0r 6 years ago
beem0r
Ah yes. I'm not actually Christian myself, anyway. However, I would think that the worldly punishment would mean it's a manmade law rather than divinely enforced. If it said "You're going to hell if you're gay," then I'd assume that's a law dictated by this hypothetical God. However, it simply said you'd be put to death. It seems like God wouldn't have to dole out worldly punishments, since he's got an eternity with which to enact his punishment. Ergo, I argued that it was a law made by man rather than by God.
Which happens to be what I think anyway, but then again I don't believe in said God.
Posted by Korezaan 6 years ago
Korezaan
"However, you fail to recognize that this was simply a law enacted by man to discourage homosexuality and encourage growth of society through reproduction. While some might argue that the bible is the infallible word of god, this is simply not the case. God did not dictate the entire bible to its authors, nor did he give his stamp of approval to each verse within."

Alright, but you never say what part exactly IS the word of God. There's this whole thing with the Bible these days where churches constantly change their interpretations of the 'holy text' to fit the accepted values at the time. If there are 'absolute' corrects and incorrects, which I also believe there are, then Christians should be able to point out and say "This is the word of God. We will stand by it".

That's why I respect Fundamentalists to some extent more than the 'generic christian' (not trying to compare you guys to spam or orange soda or anything), because they stand by their text, unwavering. They claim they have the absolute truth, they stand by it. Now, most Christians say that "This is the absolute truth!" but when they're wrong all you guys say is "Oh we read it wrong!" or "Human authors!"

You chose the latter argument.

You didn't tell me what exactly in the Bible IS straight from God.

Too bad that wasn't the topic.

I negate.
Posted by goldspurs 6 years ago
goldspurs
Atleast no one can say you acted immature.
Posted by beem0r 6 years ago
beem0r
Maybe you should have made that as the debate then ;)
Heck, you can make a new one anytime with that as the topic.
Posted by Gotid24 6 years ago
Gotid24
Its cool. God is still as real as the spagetti monster, as superman, and as the tooth fairy.
Posted by lorenz 6 years ago
lorenz
It might have been possible for Pro to win this debate, but then you would have had to put "assume the entire Torah is the irrefutable Word of God" as a ground rule. That would have been the only way to do it. However, Christians believe that the old Law was abrogated by Jesus when he gave the two Great Commandments to replace it, so the outcome of this debate with those ground rules would have done nothing to challenge their belief.
Posted by goldspurs 6 years ago
goldspurs
It seemed the Pro became aware that he was losing the argument and decided to just attack Christianity. All he appeared to want to do was cliam the Con is wrong because the religion is false in his eyes.

Obviously the Con wins.
Posted by mmadderom 6 years ago
mmadderom
And where did "natural" come from? Big bang? Who lit the firecracker?

It's pretty well accepted that energy doesn't self-propagate. So how did the "big-bang" happen?
Posted by TheKid 6 years ago
TheKid
FiredUpRepublican is right about Old/New Laws. The passages in Leviticus are in a list that also outlaws such "abominations" as shellfish. Based only on the Leviticus passages, Christians are allowed to be homosexual for the same reasons they are allowed to eat shellfish. I think there are some New Testament passages about homosexuality being sinful though (maybe in a letter to the Apostles?).

Speaking of the New Testament, it is pretty tough to read that book and believe that the Christian God "hates" anyone.

Beem0r, loved your argument about Noah and Ham. It seems really obvious now, but I don't think I had ever heard it before.
24 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Rosewood 4 years ago
Rosewood
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:24 
Vote Placed by Logical-Master 5 years ago
Logical-Master
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by EnLi 6 years ago
EnLi
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by JUDGE 6 years ago
JUDGE
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by THEmanlyDEBATER3 6 years ago
THEmanlyDEBATER3
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Korezaan 6 years ago
Korezaan
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Sanchez 6 years ago
Sanchez
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Grandma 6 years ago
Grandma
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by jimmy_slay 6 years ago
jimmy_slay
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Chob 6 years ago
Chob
Gotid24beem0rTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30