The Instigator
ConservativePolitico
Pro (for)
Winning
11 Points
The Contender
DakotaKrafick
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

Insulting Jesus In a Debate Constitutes the Loss of the Conduct Point

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
ConservativePolitico
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/10/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,520 times Debate No: 22731
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

ConservativePolitico

Pro

This is a debate I challenged someone to a while ago but they refused to take it but I am now curious to see if there is anyone else who would argue the point here.

First round is for acceptance.

3 rounds total
5,000 character limit

Should be a pretty short, easy going debate if done well.

I look forward to an opponent.

Thank you!
DakotaKrafick

Con

I accept.
Debate Round No. 1
ConservativePolitico

Pro

Thank you.

Insults & Debating

Insults have no place in the realm of formal debate. No insult of any kind should be posted in a debate because insults are unprofessional and unsportsmanlike. Attacking a figure does nothing for the debate and insults never add to the purpose or drive of a debate.

Voting Rules

"Which debater, on balance, was more composed, and used fewer or no personal attacks against their opponent? Improper conduct includes personal insults, profanities, and bad sportsmanlike behavior." [1]

Personal insults are included when weighing the loss of the conduct point. It never says who the personal insults target because any sort of insult has no place in a debate. Since insulting Jesus would count as a personal insult (since Jesus was a person) this falls under the voting guidelines that outlines the loss of this point.

Also, in insulting such a prominent religious and historical figure could in turn insult those who adhere or respect him as a person which is why insults count as misconduct. What this means is that this simple insult could actually cross a wide range of misconduct some of which are outlined in the Terms of Use.

The DDO Terms of Use bans the use of "personal attacks" and "religious slurs". [2] Depending on who reads the insult (and if it is in a DDO debate a large host of people could be subject to the insult in question) it could very well be considered a personal attack (on Christians) or even a racial slur depending on the severity.

Also, insults are considered unsportsmanlike behavior because they can add nothing to a debate and are generally used to debase a person or opponent which is not fair nor does it show upstanding conduct and character. Since there are no positive connotations to insults and they have no place in debate they can safely be classified as unsportsmanlike. That's two parts of the voting guidelines such an insult violates.

Therefore, any insult on Jesus Christ in a debate would constitute the loss of the conduct point for these various reasons backed up by both the voting rules set up in the DDO Orientation and the Terms of Service.

Thank you.



[1] http://www.debate.org...
[2] http://www.debate.org...
DakotaKrafick

Con

Pro says insults have no place in a debate, but that is untrue. Is it really a wonder why the resolution mentions Jesus and not Hitler? Being politically correct, actually, can hinder communication more than necessary or desired. If we were debating the justness of Nazi Germany's actions, I would be in my rights to insult the nazi party ideals. In fact, just taking the Con side of such a debate and arguing against the nazi party could be seen as an insult against them.

Similarly, just by taking Con in this debate, I would inevitably be insulting some people. But what is the difference between insulting Jesus and Hitler? One was a madman and one was not? Maybe, but that's just an opinion, as subjective as what exactly should be considered "insulting".

To say we shouldn't be allowed to insult Jesus without some sort of penalty would be to say we can't debate Jesus' existence, divinity, sexual orientation, or pretty much anything else about him, including this debate itself! (for some people would surely be insulted)

DDO bans the use of "religious slurs" which probably means unnecessary hate speech toward a particular religious group (ie, "Christians are all idiotic"). That much I can agree with. That would be a hateful generalization and specifically targeted to hurt every Christian's feelings.

However, to say "Jesus was most plausibly a homosexual" or "Jesus' divinity is unsupported by the evidence" could also be seen as insulting to Jesus and insulting to the Christian religion, but really they're just interesting resolutions to debate. Sure, some people might find it insulting, but those who are ultra-sensitive to reading differing opinions to their own really shouldn't be on DDO in the first place.

What DDO's terms of service was most likely constructed for is to set up guidelines for everyone to get along with each other but at the same time debate interesting and controversial topics. To say insulting Jesus is taboo is to erase the possibility of a lot of fun, controversial debates on one of the most important issues of our time: Christianity.

You're welcome.
Debate Round No. 2
ConservativePolitico

Pro

The crux of my opponents argument is thus: since insults are subjective they should be permitted in a debate.

Just because some insults are subjective no means opens the door for all types of insults to be allowed. Any type of insult, Jesus or not , should not be allowed in a debate for they are not constructive.

Also, I think we have a different view of what constitutes an insult.

"Jesus was most plausibly a homosexual" or "Jesus' divinity is unsupported by the evidence" are not insults but opinions that can be backed up. I'm talking about phrases that are purposefully used to hurt and degrade the character or description of Jesus for the sole purpose of angering the opponent. A true insult.

Controversial opinions do not equal insults.

"DDO bans the use of "religious slurs" which probably means unnecessary hate speech toward a particular religious group (ie, "Christians are all idiotic")"

Such hate speech or unnecessary comments toward a group can also be applied to the figure of Jesus and therefore requires the loss of the conduct point.

And, insulting Hitler would be no different from insulting Jesus because the very nature of an insult, its purpose and its use have no place in any sort of debate.

Insults don't belong in a debate, using them requires the loss of conduct.

Controversial opinions =/= insults

Insults must be purposefully hurtful.

Thank you.

DakotaKrafick

Con

DakotaKrafick forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by ConservativePolitico 4 years ago
ConservativePolitico
No problem.
Posted by DakotaKrafick 4 years ago
DakotaKrafick
Hm, while I do post last-minute quite often, FFing is quite rare for me. Sorry about that, CP.
Posted by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
Darn, I wish I saw this one.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
ConservativePoliticoDakotaKrafickTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct = FF. Args was to pro, not just because the FF means he drops CP's final analysis, crippling in 2 rounds of argumentation, 1 for acceptance, he never refuted Pros arguments enough to convince me. Also Pro proved that insults are not good in a debate, conduct is mainly attributed to insults and civil behavior. As pro proved insulting Jesus is mean to Christians and a historical figure, Pro wins the debate. Insults, as pro said last round, don't belong in debate
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
ConservativePoliticoDakotaKrafickTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro proves that insults must be purposely hurtful, and refuted Con's claims that about "Jesus is gay" debates. Conduct for ff. Sources for using them.
Vote Placed by Maikuru 4 years ago
Maikuru
ConservativePoliticoDakotaKrafickTied
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: Pro argues that "any type of insult...should not be allowed in a debate." He then goes on to dismiss Con's examples of potentially insulting resolutions (e.g. Jesus was a homosexual) as valid areas for discussion and permissible in debates. As he did not initially define what constitutes an insult, Pro opened the door for such contradictory viewpoints and concedes that topics some consider insulting can seem reasonable to others. Conduct to Pro for forfeit, arguments to Con.