The Instigator
Wallstreetatheist
Pro (for)
Tied
3 Points
The Contender
larztheloser
Con (against)
Tied
3 Points

Google+ Hangout Debate: Justice Requires the Recognition of Animal Rights

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 2 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/7/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,665 times Debate No: 26044
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (13)
Votes (2)

 

Wallstreetatheist

Pro

Resolved: Justice Requires the Recognition of Animal Rights

Good debate, Lars. Hope to do a good one on Insider Trading in a few days.

Debate ends at 45:30. Feel free to skip through the prep time periods.

Pro/Affirmative: Wallstreetatheist (blue shirt and Americanish)
Con/Negative: larztheloser (black sweatshirt and New Zealandish--think Flight of the Conchords)

;
larztheloser

Con


Watch my copy of the video instead. It will save you from having to skip ahead a bunch of times.

Apologies in advance for the poor quality of my case. I literally prepared it 10 minutes before and this was my first live LD debate. Thanks to my opponent for working everything out.

The debate was awesome fun. Looking forward to our future insider trading rematch!
Debate Round No. 1
13 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
I have neither video nor audio capabilities on my computer so I think I'm forced to spectate for now lol.
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
I really enjoyed this debate and I look forward to seeing more like it. I have actively avoided reading on this resolution in the past because I find it boring. Also, like larz, I didn't (and still don't, really) know anything about LD debates. That said, the live video aspect of this really kept me interested.

Given the opportunity to vote, I'd give arguments to Pro. I think Con had a potentially winning approach with his second criteria for rights (experience vs understanding) but as he pointed out, the debate never focused on that argument and thus Con never had (or took) the opportunity to necessarily expand on it. Pro's case, on the other hand, was so tight and organized that he was able to steer the conversation in the direction he wanted almost from the very start. Good debate overall.
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
Whoa. You guys do LD? I'm so down.
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
I felt like we both did okay on this topic. Anyway, Lars and I will be doing a debate on Insider Trading (or whatever topic I pick, since he will debate literally anything). I'll take more time to write a case and think it out; I'll tell Lars to do the same.

I'll be willing to debate you on schtuphffffffffe on Google+ Hangouts as well. I have no idea what your positions are on anything unrelated to comic books.
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
What the what?! I didn't even notice the 3 day voting period last night -_-"
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
Live video debate! This seems awesome. I plan on watching the entire thing tomorrow (3 am here).
Posted by nate.DDOqa 5 years ago
nate.DDOqa
Just a suggestion: When one side is arguing can the other mute their mic so the video doesn't switch back and forth.
Posted by InVinoVeritas 5 years ago
InVinoVeritas
Damn, there should be, like, four-way 2-vs-2 debates.
Posted by bossyburrito 5 years ago
bossyburrito
A sexy accent for a sexy man ;)
Posted by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
Oh yeah, I can do that now. The video is just a link to the video holding in YouTube on my account, so I can edit it there.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by socialpinko 5 years ago
socialpinko
WallstreetatheistlarztheloserTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Come on Smithereens. RFD please.
Vote Placed by Smithereens 5 years ago
Smithereens
WallstreetatheistlarztheloserTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Excellent debate! I think both sides presented sound reasoning for their cases. I was slightly more convinced by Larz however. But in manner, both sides were excellent speakers.