The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
4 Points

Guinea pigs should be forced to wear shoes

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/7/2015 Category: Health
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 452 times Debate No: 78486
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




I would like for first round to be of acceptance. This is a topic that I hold near and dear to my heart so prepare for a fierce battle!



Thanks to Pro for sending me this challenge and good luck, I'm like SO excited! It's a great pleasure to be a spokesperson for the guinea pigs of the world.
Debate Round No. 1


I thank my opponent for accepting this debate. May the nine divines grace shine upon us this day!

I would like to begin this debate by defining what a guinea pig is...

Guinea pig - A cancerous beast with claws capable to rending human flesh if left untreated. They feast of cracker jacks and human cartilage. They tend to find dark places pleasing to take up residence within.

Now for the arguement


--Guinea pigs have been allowed to walk this earth shoeless for far to long. They have failed to wear shoes when given the opportunity too in recent years and as such I now beleive that it is time for them to be FORCED to wear such astheicly pleaseing footwear as seen in (Figure 1*). These filthy beasts will know comfort if legislation moving through congress passes next week.


--My opponent states "I'm like SO excited" I would like for my audience to realize that this is animal cruelty!these beasts to suffer as they walk among their wood chip covered floorings. She has also failed to express her loyalty to the Moon Clan in round one and as such has lost the conduct point.

--My opponent also makes mention of being a "spokesperson for the guinea pigs of the world" Let us hope that this is true and that my opponent brings a viable argument in her first attempt at disputing these facts.


--Guinea Pigs are wretched beasts, with eneourmous salty genitals.




Thanks Pro.


Firstly, I'd like to begin by giving the correct definition of what a "guinea pig" is--as Pro has exclusively relied on his own personal opinion as to this creature is defined.

Guinea pig


1. Any of various small, stocky, short-eared rodents of the genus Cavia of South America, having no visible tail. The domesticated species C. porcellus is widely kept as a pet and is used in biomedical research.

So, this is a guinea pig. I'd ask that readers and any potential voters keep in mind that Pro has used a fabricated and non-official definition; something that considerably undermines his case.

In his argument Pro states that the main reason [so far, the only reason he's given] that guinea pigs should wear shoes is that they 'have been allowed to walk this earth shoeless for far to long'. The first issue with his statement is that the word 'to' should be 'too', a major grammatical error from Pro we see here. To say that guinea pigs actually walk the earth is perhaps an overstatement, as well. Namely guinea pigs use their tiny little feet to walk around to some *very* small places and can only do *very* short distances.

It's hardly as if guinea pigs are able to complete long journeys on their own or go out among humans in public off their own accord, or indeed take long trips abroad which thus would enable them to 'walk the earth'. Simply put, guinea pigs cannot do this. If they are domesticated, much of their time is spent within their cage or taking short walks to nearby areas within the accommodation that they're in. Quite possibly that walk can be to the table, or the television, the magazine area, or to the cupboard. Then, they'd go back into their cage.

So far Pro has provided no *real* reason that supports his case. Basically, his argument is devoid of validity. Just because something walks it does not mean that it requires shoes. The only living being that wears or desires shoe wear on this earth is the human. Even animals that walk longer distances than guinea pigs, such as dogs. cats, and those that you get in the wild, do not wear or need any shoes.

Moreover, what possible shoes can a guinea pig actually wear? And would it be comfortable wearing them? These are two basic questions that Pro is required to answer. The feet of guinea pigs are absolutely tiny, so making the right kind of shoe and a pair that actually fit would be an extremely difficult job for the shoemaker. And then the owner[s] of the guinea pig have the duty of placing the shoes on its feet. Who can be bothered to do THAT?

Shortly said, it would be an unnecessary pursuit--especially as it would also cost money to make the shoes.

As for Pros rebuttals, this is where they are wrong:

- By stating that I was 'SO excited', I was merely implying that I was excited to debate this interesting topic! One should not accept a debate without feeling a PASSION for it.

-The guinea pig would be uncomfortable walking around on wooden floor with shoes.

-The moon clan is a private matter, and bares no relevance to this debate what so ever. All readers can see that I have not violated any conduct rules.

-My spokesperson status for guinea pigs is fully correct, Pro will be able to see the viability of that when he reads this argument.

-The picture that Pro includes in his source only shows a guinea pig wearing bandages on its feet, not actual shoes. Therefore it is misleading and inaccurate.

Before the next round I'd also like to highlight another serious grammar error from Pro, one that is considered a major offence to the grammar Nazi's.

He wrote 'arguement', which is actually 'argument'--with no 'E'.

Debate Round No. 2


Initiation Complete!


HM thanks for this fascinating debate. Vote CON everybody!

And I mean someone BITTE VOTE!

Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by PowerPikachu21 1 year ago
"sees title 'Guinea pigs should be forced to wear shoes' "... That's cute, but it's also animal abuse, and just wrong. 'forced' means 'to do against the will of the experiencer' (in my own words). This is morally wrong. If the case were "guinea pigs should be able to wear cute shoes", I'd agree. But they are being stuffed in the shoes, against their will.
Posted by tejretics 1 year ago
== RFD ==

Pro does not adequately justify their case. Pro"s only argument is that "guinea pigs have been shoeless for far too long" -- and this is a *bare assertion.* "Too long" is a subjective term, so I wouldn"t vote on this argument anyway. The argument is (1) barely asserted and (2) insufficiently explained. Con strikes the vagueness in this argument. The case is just *vague,* and there is no good warrant for the sole contention. Pro then strawmans Con by misrepresenting their acceptance as an argument.

S&G. Pro misspells "too," "argument," "aesthetically," and "enormous." Pro"s frequent lack of punctuation also often really hurt readability. The case is hard to read because of the poor S&G, so I have to award S&G to Con.

Ergo, I vote Con.
Posted by Guffrus 1 year ago
You didnt cite a source regarding the enourmously salty genitals claim. Kinda sounds like this is just your subjective opinion? Furthermore what size of dataset are you basing your opinions on? Is this really representative of guinea pigs in general or is it infact just your guinea pig?
Also, and i realise this is pure speculation at this point, but perhaps if you changed the pants you were forcing it to wear more frequently its genitals wouldnt get to be so salty in the first place?

They are a menace though, I would definately have to agree with you on that point.

1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year ago
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: RFD in comments.