The Instigator
Max.Wallace
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
willhudson79
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

Illegal immigration is a cowardly act. Stand and fight for America in your own country.

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 3 votes the winner is...
willhudson79
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/2/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,036 times Debate No: 61196
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (38)
Votes (3)

 

Max.Wallace

Pro

If you are considering busting our borders for a better life then you are simply to weak and cowardly to fight within your own for goodness. You are big fat sucker fish.
willhudson79

Con


I am glad we get to debate again. I accept.


Debate Round No. 1
Max.Wallace

Pro

From your commentary, I believe we are on the same side unless you seek to further the destruction of the American dream.
willhudson79

Con


To begin the debate is not about whether illegal immigrant is good or bad, only “that it is a cowardly act.” Many of the illegal immigrants in the country are children, as witnessed in recent news. The process for children involves traveling with coyotes (paid by their parents) for thousands of miles across very volatile countries and harsh terrain to arrive in the United States hoping to gain entry based on political asylum, a designation that the United States often grants to individuals seeking asylum because of political, racial, or ethnic violence taking place in their home country. It is difficult to see how parents, fearing for their children’s lives and the children reaching the boarder, some entering illegally could be said to be a cowardly act. It appears to be quite the opposite. To the second part of the proposition, “Stand and fight for America in your own country,” it is unclear what this could entail in concrete terms. How could say someone in Mexico stand up and fight for America in their own country, when the United States and Mexico are allies as well as trade partners. And actually, many illegal immigrants that arrived as children in the United States, identify as Americans, the American ethos, and the American military. Currently, many of immigrants that arrived as children as lobbying Congress to pass legislation that would allow them to serve in the military since they’ve spent their entire adult lives in the United States [1]. Therefore, what does “Stand and fight for America in your own country” if these immigrants arrived as children in the United States, have spent their lives here, and now want to stand and fight for America


[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com...



Debate Round No. 2
Max.Wallace

Pro

I would never blame the children, bold faced liar. It is not the childrens fault for their plight. Quoting the huffer is not grounds for credibility, unless political subservience is what you wish, as all news sources are politically directed. Why are you such a font manipulating troll? Bold print is believable? You hope on senor', the far left bandwagon. hop.
willhudson79

Con


I would like to thank Pro for our second debate. And I would like to thank the voters for taking the time to consider the arguments made by each side.


Pro made two statements that provide good evidence for Con’s position. First, Pro stated, “I would never blame the children.” Second, Pro stated, “It is not the childrens fault for their plight.” According to Mother Jones Magazine in 2014, 70,000 undocumented children will attempt to cross into the United States illegally [1]. From Pro statement I glean, he does not consider illegal immigration by children to be “cowardly” if he “would never blame the children” and the fact “it is not the childrens fault for their plight. Therefore, Pro in the last round seems to have move toward Con’s position because he indicated that children are not to blame, he conceded that some form of illegal immigration are in fact not cowardly. Moreover, Pro did not explain the meaning or how an illegal immigrant “could stand and fight for America in their own country.” One more question I would have posed to Pro had there been another round is how can a person that lives in another country, also engage in a “cowardly act” “fight for America in their country” and also be an “illegal immigrant” inside the United States? I do not understand how all of these can function toward and have any consistency.


Again, I would like to thank my opponent for the debate. Good luck in the future. And thank you voters for considering the arguments debated.





[1] http://www.motherjones.com...


Debate Round No. 3
38 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 2 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
Then you must be blind, if you believe power is distributed equitably in America.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
It is almost impossible to adopt them, thanks to liberals.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
The only slavery I see in America today is the slaves of the democrats. All those obedient followers in the welfare rolls.The dumocrats tell them to " jump"and the slaves say, " how high,massa.Just throw us some more welfare crumbs."
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 2 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
Again, I never said equal, I said equitable. You truly must be the one detached from reality, as you don't seem to be reading what I actually said. That's right, out your head in the sand, and pretend it doesn't happen, because it does. Of course that's the individuals fault isn't it, because the strong should always rule over the weak, the morality of slavery.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
os: If a person is working 16 hours a day and only making enough to put food on the table, especially in this country, he is doing something wrong and needs to find out what it is and correct himself. Equal distributionod qwealth is as if teacher took the grades from all the "a" students, dropped them to a "c", and took the grades from "e" students and raised them to a "c".Now everbody is equal and can now dance in the streets.You liberals live in an alternate universe.Everything is upside down.
The truth is that the "A" student will get discouraged, and the "E" student will be even lazier.A man's heart is the core of how he thinks.You have a liberal heart. twisted thinking.And as far as the junkie goes. if he had any wealth at all he would probably be already be dead.
And who are you calling a slave owner?And that rehab is a joke. You need to start living in the real world.
Posted by RevL8ion 2 years ago
RevL8ion
Why do you always harass your opponent? Quit saying things such as "big fat sucker fish" or "two-faced liar." You make yourself sound much more immature than an average 41 year old. Behave yourself.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 2 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
Or a person who works sixteen hours a day, seven days a week, only to earn enough to put food on his families table, while somebody else, who works half the time, earns twice the income. Of course, according to you, this is because the worker is lazy, something which to me, is pure nonsense, precisely for the point I've just made. Sorry, but I don't know what you mean by a persons heart. Exactly, because the market is flawed, and allows inequity to ensue, where the strong control the weak, just like the state of nature. I really don't care what god says, why should I be surprised that a slave owner doesn't believe in the equitable distribution of power. Or, give a heroin junkie rehab, and he or she will be clean in a number of days, and a junkie already has wealth, how else would they be a junkie?
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
osiris:Not at all. All I want is the wealthy to have the same protections as the poor. Not to have what they earn stolen. Whether that be by another citizen or government,Equal opportunity does or should not insure equal outcome. A person doing the same job wholeheartedly will have a different outcome as one who is lazy about his work. In the long run. What is in a persons heart will determine his outcome. You redistributionists could take all the wealth and distribute it equally among all people. I contend that within 10 years the wealthy today would be wealthy again.The poor today would have squandered all that new found wealth and would be poor again.Because prosperity or poverty is a heart matter.God says he wishes above all things that we prosper and be in health, even as our souls prosper.Give a heroine junkie wealth and he would be dead in a matter of days.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 2 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
No, because in case you haven't noticed, there is no equity in the distribution of the means of production in the first place. If laws seek to address that, it isn't one seeking to have more power on another, but equity between individuals restored. Again, I don't care about equality. It seems to me, however, that you want that power to be inequitable between individuals, where subservience persists and the weak lay below the powerful.
Posted by Max.Wallace 2 years ago
Max.Wallace
I am effin terrified, so I guess we are in the same boat, but all the same, I have no fear.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 2 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
Max.Wallacewillhudson79Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Bravery proven.
Vote Placed by Codedlogic 2 years ago
Codedlogic
Max.Wallacewillhudson79Tied
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 Checkmark1 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: Pro completely failed to put forth an argument for their position.
Vote Placed by RobertMcclureSmith 2 years ago
RobertMcclureSmith
Max.Wallacewillhudson79Tied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro attacked Con on several times. Con gets conduct points. Con provided an argument and asked reasonable question, so I give Con points for a more convincing argument. Con provided two sources and Pro did not provide sources, so Con gets those points.