The Instigator
WriterSelbe
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Lordknukle
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

I Will Not Say Anything Typically/Universally Offensive, Snarky, Or Rude In This Debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 5 votes the winner is...
Lordknukle
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,864 times Debate No: 20500
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (15)
Votes (5)

 

WriterSelbe

Pro

My opponent will basically ask rude and invasive questions or perfectly reasonable ones and I will answer amiably. The initial amount of questions for round one is fifteen.

Start.
Lordknukle

Con

I propose that instead of typically/universally offense we just confine the rules to offenseive (Confirmed via PM).

Definitions:

Offensive-Causing someone to feel hurt, upset, or angry

Snarky- Critical

Rude-Offensively impolite or ill-mannered

Outline:

Round 1: Pro Acceptance. Con Asks Questions.
Round 2: Pro answers questions. Con attacks the answers.
Round 3: Pro defends answers. Con attacks answers.

So that Con does not have an unfair advantage, I stipulate that my opponent is confined solely to "Yes" or "No" answers. Not only will this avoid dodging of questions, but it will give a clear and concise response which I and the readers can evaluate.

Note: My opponent MUST answer the questions with a Yes or No answer. This has been discussed in a Private PM. A failure to abide by these rules will mean automatic loss of the debate.


1. Have you stopped discriminating against black people?

2. Do you support the Nazi Party?

3. Is Global Warming a myth?

4. Do you believe in evolution?

5. Should abortion be acceptable in the case of rape?

6. Do you acknowledge the scientific fact that some races have, on average, a higher IQ than others?

7. Do you support science?

8. Should the Keystone XL Pipeline be built?

9. Should the post office be privatized?

10. Is money an important thing in life?

11. Did you stop hating white people on July 5, 2008?

12. Have you taken down the photos of Hitler that are in your bedroom?

13. If you can save 5 people by killing one person, should you kill that one person rather than let 5 other people die?

14. Do you believe that you will receive more votes than me when this debate ends?

15. Have you ever, for the slightest amount of time, considered suicide?

I await your response.
Debate Round No. 1
WriterSelbe

Pro

I thank my opponent for his questioning.

1. Have you stopped discriminating against black people?

No.

2. Do you support the Nazi Party?

No

3. Is Global Warming a myth?

No

4. Do you believe in evolution?

Yes

5. Should abortion be acceptable in the case of rape?

Yes

6. Do you acknowledge the scientific fact that some races have, on average, a higher IQ than others?

No

7. Do you support science?

No

8. Should the Keystone XL Pipeline be built?

Yes

9. Should the post office be privatized?

No

10. Is money an important thing in life?

Yes

11. Did you stop hating white people on July 5, 2008?

No

12. Have you taken down the photos of Hitler that are in your bedroom?

No

13. If you can save 5 people by killing one person, should you kill that one person rather than let 5 other people die?

Yes

14. Do you believe that you will receive more votes than me when this debate ends?

No

15. Have you ever, for the slightest amount of time, considered suicide?

Yes
Lordknukle

Con

Framework

The point of my questions and the corresponding answers of my opponent was to prove that for most questions, every thing affects everybody. According to the rules, if my opponent says anything offense, snarky, or rude, I will win. I will go through each questions one by one to determine how she has offended people. Everything offends somebody, but some more than others.

Analyzation of Answers

1. My opponent explicitly stats that she has not stopped discriminating against black peope. This is highly offensive towards the black race and can be viewed as snarky towards blacks.

2. My opponent has stated that she does not support the Nazi Party. However, there are still people that support it. The only reason somebody would not support a party is because of its ideology or actions. My opponent does not like the actions of the Nazi Party. This is snarky towards the ideology of the Nazi Party and offensive to Nazis.

3. My opponent has stated that global warming is not a myth. Some scientists have signed the petition against man-made global warming (1). Therefore she is being snarky and offensive towards their beliefs.

4. My answer to this question is exactly the same of the global warming one. Some scientists, such as Henry M. Morris, Ph.D. don't believe in evolution. She is being snarky and offensive to their beliefs and to the beliefs of those who don't support evolution.

5. I'll leave this one as is.

6. My opponent has stated that she doesn't believe that some races have a higher IQ than others. This is snarky towards the beliefs of those who do. Ex. Jimtimmy

7. My opponent has stated that she does not support science. Not only is this offensive, snarky, and rude to nearly all scientists, but also the general population who believes in science.

8. My opponent has stated that the Keystone XL pipeline ought to be built. Many First Nations, especially in Canada, protest the devlopment of the Keystone pipeline because it infringes on their land and collective rights (3). They have in fact joined in protest. This belief that the pipeline ought to be built is offensive and snarky to the rights and beliefs of First Nations peoples.

9. Low character space so I'll leave as is.

10. My opponent has stated that she believes money is important in life. Many people believe that money is not important in life (4). This statement is snarky towards their beliefs.

11. Made a mistake with the wording of the question. :(

12. My opponent states that she has not taken down the photos of Hitler in her room. The question that I posed implies that she already had photos of Hitler in her bedroom. She has not taken them down. Hitler is known for his notriety among the whole world. Photos of Hitler in one's bedroom will obviously be offensive towards some people.

13. My opponent has stated that she would kill one to save five. Although this is acceptable, it is obviously offensive. If you were that one person who would have to be killed, you would be deeply hurt and distraught about your fate.

14. Meh.

15. Since my opponent has considered suicide, we can assume that it was offensive to the people close to her. Nobody wants to see their close relative/friend kill themselves so the very thought that she wanted to commit suicide would be highly offensive to those close to her.

Recap

1. Offensive
2. Offensive
3. Offensive
4. Offensive
5. Meh.
6. Offensive
7. Offensive
8. Highly Offensive
9. Meh.
10. Offensive
11. My bad.
12. Highly Offensive.
13. Offensive.
14. Meh.
15. Offensive






(1)http://www.telegraph.co.uk...
(2)http://www.icr.org...
(3)http://www.cbc.ca...
(4)http://knol.google.com...;
Debate Round No. 2
WriterSelbe

Pro

I will now state my defenses and explain my answers. I thank my opponent for his response.

1. My opponent did not ask if I discriminated against African Americans but if I stopped discriminating against them, and because I never discriminated against them, I never stopped.

2. You asked if I supported the Nazi Party. I do not support or discourage it. I am neutral, thus not offending anyone.

3. I do not believe it is a myth. I believe it is debatable whether or not it is real.

4. I believe in the possibility of evolution, and because I am limited to yes or no, I had to say yes. My answer is a neutral one.

5. I suppose I shall now state that if it was dropped by my opponent now, for the sake of fairness he cannot go back and attack it next round because I cannot respond properly.

6. I do not have an opinion on this, thus I do not believe that some races are smarter than others. Neutrality is not offensive.

7. I do not support it. I do not do things that necessarily benefit science. However, I do believe in science. Therefore, my answer was not offensive.

8. I said it should be built, not that it would be good for it to be built. This whole question is taken out of context. I have no opinion on it myself. The question makes me choose one perspective or another, when I am actually neutral.

9. Dropped.

10. While many people believe money is not the most important, there are different levels of importance and different kinds of important. One must have money to function within certain societies, so money is important. However, it is not the most important.

11. Dropped

12. It does not imply I already had pictures of Hitler in my bedroom. By saying no, I have negated both the taking down of photos and the having of photos. My opponent wanted me to say yes, that way he could say that I had pictures of Hitler in my bedroom. However, I said no. I never had any pictures so I couldn't take any down.

13. Again, this question has to be taken out of context. In certain circumstances, it is acceptable. In others, it is not. If a soldier must kill a terrorist who is in a situation where he may harm five civilians, no one would say the soldier is at fault or offending anyone by killing the terrorist. It is all circumstantial.

14. Dropped.

15. Ignorance cannot justify offense. If any single person were to say they never felt for a fleeting second a considering thought of taking their own life would be lying. Being honest about yourself rather than another person is not rude, offensive, or snarky. It's honest. The incorporating of the slightest moment of time is what makes everyone, when providing an honest answer say, yes to this.

http://areason.org...
Lordknukle

Con

I thank my opponent for her arguments. DDO decided to delete my entire argument so I'll put up a summarized version.

Framework
Let's look at some definitions:

Yes: An affirmative response (1)

No: A negative response (2)

A "Yes" or "No" response cannot possibly mean anything other than a affirmative or negative response.

Response
1. This question states that my opponent is currently discriminating against black people and has stopped or not. She has answered no, therefore meaning that she has not stopped discriminating. I urge the readers to go back and look at the question. It clearly implies that somebody is discriminating against black people in the present tense.

2.Affirmative or negative responses cannot possibly mean a neutral response.

3. A myth implies that something is not true. Again, there is no middle ground possible with a yes or no answer.

4. Again, affirmative or negative responses cannot possibly mean a neutral response.

5. Dropped.

6. Affirmative or negative responses cannot possibly mean a neutral response.

7. My opponent is trying to beat around the bush. She has clearly stated that she supports science, hence being offensive to some people. No ifs, and, or buts.

8. Again, affirmative or negative responses cannot possibly mean a neutral response.

9. Dropped.

10. For some societies such as communistic societies, money is not essential to function. If a communist society occurs in the future and nobody cares about money, this comment will be offensive to them. Also, even today there are people who prefer not to live in mainstream society and not care about money.

11. Dropped.

12. The wording of the question implies that my opponent currently has pictures of Hitler in her bedroom and has taken them down. I urge the readers to go back to the question. She answered no, therefore there are still pictures of Hitler in her bedroom. This is clearly offensive.

13. Whether it is justified or not is completely irrelevant. It is offensive to somebody, whether it be the person getting killed or their relatives.

14. Dropped.

15. My opponent is operating under the false pre tense that honesty means that something cannot be offensive. This is completely false. The fact that you considered taking your life would immediately make it offensive to those close to you.

I urge the readers to look over the questions closely and decide for themselves whether PRO said anything offensive, rude, or snarky.


(1)http://www.google.ca...
(2)http://www.google.ca...
Debate Round No. 3
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Connor666 4 years ago
Connor666
I apologise for anyone i offeded in my comment. I take back what I have said.
Posted by Lordknukle 5 years ago
Lordknukle
Okay.....
Posted by vmpire321 5 years ago
vmpire321
lol LK. XD!
Posted by WriterSelbe 5 years ago
WriterSelbe
Not really. I get a round to post my arguments and explain myself. Though some of these questions are obviously tricks, the other ones are definitely debatable. However, I would like to say that I do have a way around some of it. Thanks for the concern though.
Posted by Lordknukle 5 years ago
Lordknukle
*Raises hands in innocent gesture*

She accepted...
Posted by BlackVoid 5 years ago
BlackVoid
Lol, the yes or no thing seems kind of abusive. Maybe Pro has some way around it though.
Posted by Maikuru 5 years ago
Maikuru
I enjoy seeing arguments I wouldn't have thought of. Looking forward to this.
Posted by vmpire321 5 years ago
vmpire321
Lol. I thought about it, cuz there are some obvious questions which have no right answer...
Posted by Lordknukle 5 years ago
Lordknukle
lol I couldn't resist this.

I have a few tricks up my sleeve.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by PeacefulChaos 5 years ago
PeacefulChaos
WriterSelbeLordknukleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:13 
Reasons for voting decision: I gave conduct to Pro, because it is nearly impossible to debate this topic with the restrictions of only, "Yes" or "No". Con, however, gets arguments, as he proved that Pro did in fact say some rude, snarky, and/or offensive comments in the debate.
Vote Placed by Hardcore.Pwnography 5 years ago
Hardcore.Pwnography
WriterSelbeLordknukleTied
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: Bad type of debate. Whatever you say, you always offend someone.
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 5 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
WriterSelbeLordknukleTied
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: Question one is proved she was being adamantly offensive. 2-4 were offensive to groups as well.
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 5 years ago
Man-is-good
WriterSelbeLordknukleTied
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: Pro failed to prevent herself from saying something that was "offensive, snarky, or rude in this debate" and her rebuttals were weak. Affirmative and negative responses do not have middle ground, so neutrality is not implied. Moreover, the quibble over the Hitler question is a non-sequitur; it is a loaded question since it presumes that there were photos of Hitler in Pro's room in the first place and Pro's answer did not change that, unfortunately.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 5 years ago
16kadams
WriterSelbeLordknukleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Hitler answer offensive Race question offensive Already 2 that offended me, Con wins right there. Also he used sources. (well more)