The Instigator
Con (against)
0 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
3 Points


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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/18/2015 Category: Religion
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 375 times Debate No: 75482
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (1)




Bullshart. Commies and Mafioso play it every day on the victims of society.


I accept--I'll start off by wishing my opponent good luck.
Debate Round No. 1
This round has not been posted yet.
This round has not been posted yet.
Debate Round No. 2


Debate it then. I stated my opinion, debate it.


Okay, for some reason Round 2 skipped to Round 3—I am guessing this was intentional but a problem with the DDO server or something.

My opponent said he made his argument but based on what I read in Round 1, it is not actually an argument but just an unsubstantiated personal opinion. So, as the late Christopher Hitchens used to say, “What can be asserted without evidence can also be dismissed without evidence.” Thus, Con has not contributed to the debate.

Because of this, my defense of insurance as a concept will be relatively short.

Insurance has been a net benefit to people, economies, and the world. That is to say, it mitigates problems that are bond to occur, including death, sickness, natural disasters, fires, gas leaks—examples are virtually limitless, so that is my bridged version.

Anyone reading this debate has experienced some circumstance or life event where insurance of some kind helped mollify problems would have been worse than in a scenario without insurance. People understand, businesses understand this, and governments understand that insurance is a necessity in an imperfect world, this is just a simply an unpleasant fact.

Here is a concrete example:

The father of a household is the main breadwinner for his family, say mother, son, and daughter. He dies from [insert a realistic choice based on your personal preference]. Ask yourself isn’t better for everyone involved for the father to have a life insurance policy than not. With insurance, the family is less likely to have to worry whether they will be able to keep their house, pay for the funeral, or worry about having to find a job immediately after the husband’s death.

Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Max.Wallace 1 year ago
I did address the problem with insurance. The 1 voter is a fool.
Posted by Milton.Pullen 1 year ago
What happened to Round 2--did it skip on purpose or was there a problem on DDO end?
Posted by CommunistDog 1 year ago
SURE! BRING COMMUNISTS INTO THIS (I'm mad because of my name :3)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Jack.Jameswood1 1 year ago
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: Con made a more convincing argument while Pro wrote a sentence that did not directly address the problem of insurance.