The Instigator
yodailybread
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DoctorDeku
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Humanity

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/24/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 905 times Debate No: 29490
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (0)

 

yodailybread

Con

Who are we as people? Does anyone really know? Judged for our character, sexual orientation, lifestyles, religion, and race. What are we based upon if not these things? Is this not what makes us people? A person? Dare to be different,but pay the cost. No one is higher than God, yet we do not have control of ourselves. We hold true to a constitution that governs us as "people " to be what man thinks is what God wants us to be and live. And look where we are. A suffering nation divided by war, greed, selfishness, and biased. We tell others what they are allowed to think and feel, what's appropriate and what's not. And based on what? God said first and foremost, I am your leader, your judge, your source, your everything. Man is nothing. So who are you to tell me I can't look or dress this way. That I can't marry him or her. That I have to believe in your religion. The only person I have to answer to is God. The only thing you have is your opinion. We are living within the guidelines of man, not God. Yes, there are some references and I think they're only there to justify what man has set in place.
DoctorDeku

Pro

As it stands Con does not pose a full argument, as they do not have a clear claim, there is no warrant, there is no data and there is no impact. This method of advocacy is known as the Toulmin method[1] was proposed by British Philosopher Stephen Toulmin in his book 'The Uses of Argument[2]; it has since been accepted at large by the debate community as the most effective method of advocacy as it lies out the logical and empirical structure of the argument for the most effective discussion.

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

As the Contender in this debate it is not my responsibility to prove the resolution false, but to disprove the Con; I am unable to do this so long as Con fails to provide a legitimate argument. So as it stands the vote must go to the Pro for upholding their burden by omission of the Con.

The resolution is negated; Back to you Pro!
Debate Round No. 1
yodailybread

Con

Okay I agree. It may be somewhat based on that theory, but "data" wise, I don't need references to make my claim clear. Anyone with eyes can see that this world is crumbling. Nothing is based on anything worth anything. Humanity in itself is a load of bs. We elect presidents and put so much confidence in a government that doesn't even know their right from their left half the time, but I'm suppose to let them dictate my actions and well-being? I don't think so. Show me what we have done outside of screwing up and trying to back it with the Bible
DoctorDeku

Pro

My opponent has still failed to provide a particularly compelling argument, but instead a few premises by which he never really draws a conclusion. I won't be daft however, and will concede to understand what it is my opponent is trying to argue: that humanity sucks.

While I agree that there are people out there who probably don't deserve anything more than being beaten with sack of garbage, that doesn't mean that there aren't people out there who are sincerely good people.

Warren Buffet is famous for having donated 99% of his wealth to charity[3], Bill Gates alongside his wife Melinda Gates are responsible for the Bill and Melinda Gates foundation[4] which works to improve health conditions and education around the world.
[3] http://www.inquisitr.com...
[4] http://www.gatesfoundation.org...

Beyond that, we can look to a myriad of historical examples of people who have exhibited works of love and compassion; Dr. Martin Luther King Jr[5], Mahatma Ghandi[6] and Mother Teresa[7] are a few of the names that come to mind in this respect.
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org....
[6] http://en.wikipedia.org...
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org...

Furthermore my opponent never really addresses my initial argument Con's lack of presenting a qualified argument; her claim is unclear, she has no warrant and she ultimately leaves nothing for me to refute. In this regard she has failed twice now to fulfill her burden of proof; as such I urge a vote for the Pro.
Debate Round No. 2
yodailybread

Con

Actually I was referencing the government and the demands the government puts on us as people. Let me be more frank, society. That was my error in saying humanity. I am aware there are good and bad people. That wasn't my claim. I was speaking against society and it's views against individuals and trying to back it's reasoning with the Bible and God. Back to my statement in round one, who are we as people if I have to succumb to someone opinion of who I should be. People are very judgemental as well as government and instead of it being posed as their opinion, it's posed as Biblical law. That's my issue.
DoctorDeku

Pro

I have two things to say in this round, so I will be brief.
1. My opponent has proven my point in the first round in my claim that they have no clear claim.

2. My opponent has committed the fallacy of Ad Hoc Rescue[8]. The very resolution is 'humanity' and yet my opponent has changed their argument to 'society'. At the point one commits a fallacy, their opponent is exempt from having to answer that argument -- I've won.
[8] http://www.logicallyfallacious.com...

The conclusions are as follows-
1. is that my opponent has utterly failed to provide a compelling argument within the scope of the resolution.
2. My opponent has failed to attack my own arguments.
3. My opponent has committed the logical fallacy of Ad Hoc Rescue, so they have no argument to carry.

Vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 3
yodailybread

Con

yodailybread forfeited this round.
DoctorDeku

Pro

DoctorDeku forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
yodailybread

Con

yodailybread forfeited this round.
DoctorDeku

Pro

DoctorDeku forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
No votes have been placed for this debate.