The Instigator
allretardsshoulddie
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
The_Harlequin
Con (against)
Winning
56 Points

Here is how Helen Keller REALLY got deaf dumb and blind.

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: 2/3/2011 Category: Economics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,953 times Debate No: 14660
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (9)

 

allretardsshoulddie

Pro

When helen was a child, her father raped her too hard and she lost those 3 senses. I'm not saying she deserved it, that's just how it happened. Just sayin.
The_Harlequin

Con

I'd like to thank my opponent for this interesting topic.

Firstly, Pro's argument is flawed. Pro cannot prove that Keller's father raped her nor that rape can induce the loss of hearing, speech, and sight at once. Therefore Pro's model is impossible.

My alternative is that Helen Keller contracted an acute congestion of the stomach and brain at 19 months old[1] and I eagerly await Pro's counter argument.


[1]http://en.wikipedia.org...


Debate Round No. 1
allretardsshoulddie

Pro

Your source is wikipedia which can be edited by anyone so we can't know if yours is acurate either. So I still beleive she got raped too hard by her father.
The_Harlequin

Con

Dear viewers, I would make the proposition that wikipedia is in fact more reliable than allretardsshoulddie. In fact, if Pro had clicked the link it would be revealed that the article on Helen Keller is protected against vandalism. Pro has no sources other than a psychopathic conviction that all historical figures were sexually abused as extremely young children. Furthermore, Pro has not refuted my accusation that it is medically impossible for deafblindness to be induced by rape. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
allretardsshoulddie

Pro

whatever its still the reason she got that stuff
The_Harlequin

Con

Ladies and gentlemen, Pro has totally ignored their burden of proof and is stating that Helen Keller's deafblindness was an unheard of medical anomaly in which "her father raped her too hard and she lost those 3 senses." [sic] If you have any sense whatsoever, please vote Con. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by The_Harlequin 6 years ago
The_Harlequin
How else am I supposed to take it? You know this had a 500 character limit?
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
Oh nvm i take back what i said.
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
Alrite, but we all should be happy :D
the troller is no more :P
Posted by zach12 6 years ago
zach12
No I just think harlequin shouldn't have taken it so seriously especially in the second round onwards.
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
@zach12

Lol u mad?
Posted by zach12 6 years ago
zach12
Everybody takes this site way too seriously
Posted by dinokiller 6 years ago
dinokiller
Pro is the perfect reason why we all get high winzz :P
9 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Vote Placed by Nails 6 years ago
Nails
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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 InsertNameHere 6 years ago
InsertNameHere
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: It's obvious...
Vote Placed by Dakota-Hiltzman 6 years ago
Dakota-Hiltzman
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were completely ridiculous. there was no debate at all, as all of the Con's points where conceded. the Con had better conduct as well.
Vote Placed by wjmelements 6 years ago
wjmelements
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: ARGS: PRO's argument was refuted and CON's argument was not. SOURCES: PRO had no sources, while CON did. S/G: PRO lacked good spelling, punctuation, and capitalization.
Vote Placed by Cobo 6 years ago
Cobo
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Obvious
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 6 years ago
SuperRobotWars
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 
Reasons for voting decision: allretardsshoulddie simply spammed the entire debate and did not attempt to make any proper arguments, actually I shouldn't have to tell you why I voted this way for it is quite obvious.
Vote Placed by KevinW 6 years ago
KevinW
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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 Cliff.Stamp 6 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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: If you have to ask, you are related to Pro.
Vote Placed by Grape 6 years ago
Grape
allretardsshoulddieThe_HarlequinTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con took the debate seriously, made an actual argument, used an actual source, and wrote in complete sentences. Against this opponent, that is enough for 7 points.