The Instigator
imabench
Pro (for)
Losing
7 Points
The Contender
xXCryptoXx
Con (against)
Winning
19 Points

If gays couldve openly served in WW2, Saving Private Ryan wouldve been at least 1.37 hours shorter

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 10 votes the winner is...
xXCryptoXx
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/30/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,808 times Debate No: 34379
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (9)
Votes (10)

 

imabench

Pro

The full resolution is Resolved: If gays could have openly served in WW2, "Saving Private Ryan" would have been at least 1.37 hours shorter.

I am pro this resolution, and will argue that if gays could have openly served for the allied forces in WW2 and allowed to serve in the forces that landed in Normandy on D-Day, then the movie 'Saving Private Ryan' would have been at least 1.37 hours shorter.

The movie is currently 2 Hours and 49 minutes long, about 170 minutes
http://wiki.answers.com...

1st round acceptance only.
xXCryptoXx

Con


Challenge Accepted.

I am robot, I will not lose.
Debate Round No. 1
imabench

Pro

The battle of Omaha at the start of the movie lasts 27 minutes. After the battle, a group of soldiers led by Tom Hanks are tasked to finding Private Ryan, who is played by Matt Damon. If openly gay men were allowed to serve in WWII and in D-Day, then there would have been gay men in Tom Hank's company who are tasked with finding Private Ryan, aka Matt Damon. If you take away the opening battle scene at Omaha beach on D-Day, the rest of the movie lasts 2 hours and 22 minutes.

We all know fairly well though that there is no way in hell it would take a group of gay guys in France more then an hour to find Matt Damon, also in France.

So when we subtract 1 hour from the movie minus the opening battle scene:
we are left with 1 hour and 22 minutes = 1.37 hours.

It can therefore be concluded that Saving Private Ryan would be 1.37 hours shorter if gays had served in WWII because there is no way in hell it would take a group of gay guys in France longer then an hour to find Matt Damon.

:D
xXCryptoXx

Con

This is far fetched even for you Bench.

1. First off, you assume the entire rest of the movie is dedicated to finding Ryan; a lot of the movie is developement and plot leading up to that so the amount of time taken off wouldn't be that much.

2. If you want to get technical, that is not Matt Damon; that is Private Ryan. So not as famous.

3. Gay guys would constantly be complaining about their broken nails and how drab their uniforms are which is so not fabulous. They would get tired and take breaks so they could gossip about what that one soldier did a week ago. This would distract them from the mission therefore meaning the movie would actually be
longer

4. There is still no way that they would take exactly that amount of time.My opponent specifcally says 1.37 hours shorter. Well with my obviously logical arguments, the movie would have been at least 1.38 hours longer. Even if somehow my logic was flawed, there is no way Pro's timing is perfect and he has not shown why it is.

Thanks :D
Debate Round No. 2
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Yes, I do apologize for that. I did not read close enough.
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
"4. There is still no way that they would take exactly that amount of time.My opponent specifcally says 1.37 hours shorter."

Hence why the title says AT LEAST.
Posted by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
I think I would've used a different argument if I had been Con. I would've pointed out that nobody on Tom's team had any idea what Matt Damon looked like. They knew almost nothing at all about him except that his brothers had been killed.
Posted by Juris_Naturalis 3 years ago
Juris_Naturalis
So. You might think he's all that but you don't speak for all gays. Besides, Gays in the 40's wouldn't know who Damon was.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Hahaha
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
"pro cannot prove that ALL gay men are attracted to Matt Damon/Private Ryan."

HELLO, IT'S MATT DAMON FOR F**** sake
Posted by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
That was a short and entertaining debate. xD
Posted by imabench 3 years ago
imabench
Nailed it ;D
Posted by Just-Your-Average-Atheist 3 years ago
Just-Your-Average-Atheist
I get it- because there is no way it takes almost three hours for a gay guy to find Matt Damon. You sly fox. (This was posted between rounds 1 and 2)
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Contra 3 years ago
Contra
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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: Sorry Pro but Con presented stronger, if flawed, arguments.
Vote Placed by 1Historygenius 3 years ago
1Historygenius
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 was too specific for this debate. This made Con's chance of winning more simple than it would have been. Con was successfully able to refute Pro's arguments, specifically refutation 4.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 3 years ago
16kadams
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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: I actually thought this was funny. And this line won it for pro "We all know fairly well though that there is no way in hell it would take a group of gay guys in France more then an hour to find Matt Damon, also in France." LMAO. CON also misrepresents what pro was arguing (arguing?...). Pro said "at least", so cons last argument basically saying that we cant know is a red herring. Con's third argument claims that homosexuals would complain about broken nails. Pros quote above kinda beats it... how much effort do I have to put into a troll debate vote?
Vote Placed by philochristos 3 years ago
philochristos
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 makes a pretty strong argument. But unfortunately, there wasn't another round for him to respond to Con's objections. Con showed that there are more factors than mere attraction to Matt Damon to consider, and those factors could very well have slowed the movie down. So, in light of Con's arguments, Pro did not carry his burden of proof.
Vote Placed by ClassicRobert 3 years ago
ClassicRobert
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter no longer needed.
Vote Placed by Legitdebater 3 years ago
Legitdebater
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 assumes that all gays are in love with Private Ryan a.k.a. Matt Damon. However, he failed to prove this, which is why he ultimately lost the debate. If Pro had proved this, he would have one. Good debate guys. It was fabuloussssssss!
Vote Placed by Juris_Naturalis 3 years ago
Juris_Naturalis
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: The thesis wasn't something that could necessarily be proven with fact, as pro cannot prove that ALL gay men are attracted to Matt Damon/Private Ryan. Plus I don't like using wiki as a source unless none other is available.
Vote Placed by Bullish 3 years ago
Bullish
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: My first counter, is on justin.graves. Yay. I read the debate and Con did make a more convincing argument. so I take back a vote. Pro did not show why gays would take a shorter amount of time to find whoever the guy was.
Vote Placed by justin.graves 3 years ago
justin.graves
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Both used emoticons... I hate emoticons... but Pro had a few more errors than Con so Con gets spelling. Con clearly showed that SPR would not be 1.37 hours shorter if gays could openly serve in WW2. Everything else is tied. Conduct was civil on both sides... Pro used a source but it was wikianswers. Another peeve of mine just above using Wikipedia as a source. At least Wikipedia is somewhat checked for accuracy and so on. Con pulls out on this one.
Vote Placed by YYW 3 years ago
YYW
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: While ostensibly I was perplexed as to how it could be that Saving Private Ryan would be affected by allowing openly gay men to serve in the US military, after PRO's compelling argument that gay men would expeditiously chase down Matt Damon my mind is changed. Con's arguments, though salient to an extent, were insufficient to ground any rebuttal which would overcome PRO's bulletproof logic. Moreover, CON's third argument assumed a false stereotypical conception of the extent to which gay men are effeminate -which did nothing to advance his case because obviously all the effeminate gay men would have been killed as they stormed the beaches of Normandy -which would still keep the movie's time limited as PRO described.