The Instigator
VocMusTcrMaloy
Con (against)
Winning
23 Points
The Contender
Virgil.Cain
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

Inter-racial Marriage is Detrimental to Society

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 5 votes the winner is...
VocMusTcrMaloy
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/26/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,077 times Debate No: 17655
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (5)

 

VocMusTcrMaloy

Con

Resolved: Inter-racial Marriage is Detrimental to Society

My opponent, Virgil.Cain has stated the resolution in another debate. I want to thank him for accepting this debate. His acceptance will place him in the Pro position and will place on him the burden of proof. Although I will be Instigator of the debate, I will refute the resolution, and thus be Con in the debate. If the reader finds this proposition unclear, let me clarify: My opponent will argue that interracial marriage is detrimental to society; I will argue that it is not. If my opponent so chooses, he may use the Bible as an authoritative source for this debate, and I will accept it as a viable source. If my opponent prefers a secular debate, I will also debate any historic and/or scientific arguments. If he chooses a combination of secular and sacred sources, I will gladly engage him on both levels.

Being that I have given my opponent options concerning authoritative sources in this debate, if he wishes to propose a modification of the resolution of the debate to fit the evidence he uses, he may do so (as long as the resolution is still about interracial marriage, of course!)
Ex: Resolved: Interracial Marriage Violates Christian Teaching (religious debate) or
Resolved: Interracial Marriage Would Destroy The Genetic Superiority of Certain Races (scientific debate)
As it stands, the current resolution would be political debate which woul require historical evidence.

Since My opponent is Pro in the debate, the second half of the first round will be acceptance/Opening Argument; and the debate will be structured as follows:
Round 1b/2a: Opening Arguments
Round 2b/3a: Rebuttals
Round 3b/4a: Responses to Rebuttals/Con's Conclusion
Round 4b: Pro's Conclusion

Pro may define the terms of the resolution in the first round, and I will have the option to accept his terms.



I wish my opponent luck.

Let the debate begin:
Virgil.Cain

Pro

I prefer the Resolution you have selected. I am NOT arguing to criminalize inter-racial marriage. I am NOT arguing the morality of it. What this debate shall be about is whether or not the mixture of the races is harmful to society. I will be operating under the belief that to violate the purity of something (I.E. violate the purity of the different races when they inter-breed) is harmful. My Opponent must, in his next round, provide reasoning for this being un-true.

Looking forwardto a great debate!
Debate Round No. 1
VocMusTcrMaloy

Con

Opening Argument for Con

Resolved: Interracial Marriage is Detrimental to Society

Is interracial marriage detrimental to society?

My opponent has accepted the task of attempting to prove beyond reasonable doubt that interracial marriage is somehow harmful to society. (As per our agreement concerning the organization of this debate in Round 1, I will not rebuttal his Opening Argument about "purity," until Round 3.) My opponent has a twofold challenge ahead of himself because he will need to first of all show the detriment and secondly, he will need to prove that the detrimental effects he presents were caused exclusively by interracial marriage and not by other factors. This is a task that I believe my opponent will not be able to accomplish. I personally see nothing but good coming from interracial marriage (or abbreviated thus: "IR marriage"); however, it is not my debate to prove the good effects of IR marriage. I challenge my opponent to list:

Detrimental Effects

1.

2.

3.

and then to tell :

How these effects are caused exclusively by IR marriage

1.

2.

3.

If my opponent has nothing in either heading, or he has items under the "Detrimental Effects" heading but he cannot show how they are caused exclusively by IR marriage; then logically, my opponent shall have lost the debate.
Virgil.Cain

Pro

This is virgil.cains brother (and the real person is a 14 year old girl, not an 85 year old male like this profile says.) She's been tolling this site, and I got her to stop but I was going to finish the dbates so as to be fair to the Opponents. However I cant affirm this esolution. Sorry, sir.
Debate Round No. 2
VocMusTcrMaloy

Con

Thanks, I guess…? You don't have to finish the debates. Just let the time run out. Then again, you could be a mischievous brother wishing to sabotage your sibling's account. Virgil.Cain's debates and comments have not been in the spirit of trolling.
Virgil.Cain

Pro

Virgil.Cain forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
VocMusTcrMaloy

Con

Obviously, this debate has taken a turn that neither the reader nor I expected. I still would like to give the reader my rebuttal to my opponent's position that interracial marriage dilutes racial purity.

1. Bi-racial children will not be entered into a dog show, so it will never be important for them to be purely bred.

2. Europe has pure bred Englishmen, Irishmen, Germans, Italians and Frenchmen, et. al. The United States rarely has purely bred European ethnicities, that is why they are given the catch-all "White" label. Therefore, an argument for racial purity from an American is rather hypocritical.

3. Mixed blood has not stopped many from being successful. Some names that come to mind are:
a. President Barak Obama
b. Actress Halle Berry
c. American Idol Winner Jordin Sparks
These are three off the top of my head, and there are many more; but, I'm sure the reader will get the point.

4. My opponent has not offered any evidence to show that racial impurity is detrimental to society.

Thank you for reading!
Virgil.Cain

Pro

Vote Con, sorry it had to be this way.
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by innomen 2 years ago
innomen
@ Extremely-far-Right: You won't get banned for racist comments unless they are outside the ToS and are directed toward a user as abuse. I don't know the specifics of David Duke, i wasn't involved then, but generally speaking your speech is only loosely regulated.

@ 000ike: Virgil.Cain is a multi accounter with a false identity on his/her profile.
Posted by 000ike 2 years ago
000ike
I really don't buy that Virgil.Cain is a 14 year old girl. Why would a girl ever put "male" on her profile? That is very creepy, and even if he/she is a girl, I doubt that he/she is 14. His arguments have nuances of misguided life experience that one does not see with a child. If this is not a scam, and Virgil is indeed a 14 year old girl, then I can say with absolute certainty that that is the oddest 14 year old girl I have ever spoken with in my life.

1 more thing: his/her user name reminds me of some old civil war veteran (who fought for the CSA), not a teen girl.
Posted by Man-is-good 2 years ago
Man-is-good
"Virgil.Cain's debates and comments have not been in the spirit of trolling."

While Virgil.Cain's views were controversial, her debating style--on account of a cursory glance--was elaborate and detailed, and not in the 'spirit of trolling'.
Posted by SuperRobotWars 2 years ago
SuperRobotWars
Tracked just keeps me updated with comments and arguments posted on this debate.
Posted by VocMusTcrMaloy 2 years ago
VocMusTcrMaloy
Extreme-Far-Right
I saw this post concerning David_Duke:

Report PostReply & QuoteAdd Post
Lasagna
 

Posts: 250
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message7/26/2011 8:01:05 PM
Posted: 2 days ago
David_Duke was a multiaccounting troll, not an honest debater.

We were in a discussion where someone brought up David Duke as an example of extremism, and within hours that account was created.
The artist formerly known as Rob

kfc
Posted by VocMusTcrMaloy 2 years ago
VocMusTcrMaloy
Posted by SuperRobotWars 7 hours ago:

Tracked.

My response:
Please explain??
Posted by Extremely-Far-Right 2 years ago
Extremely-Far-Right
Hey Virgil.Cain, just a word of advice...don't get too crazy debating racial topics on this website. Some people like SRW will try to get you banned and stuff. There was a person called David-Duke on this website, and he argued with SRW one day, the next he was banned. So, just saying.
Posted by SuperRobotWars 2 years ago
SuperRobotWars
Tracked.
Posted by VocMusTcrMaloy 2 years ago
VocMusTcrMaloy
I have modified the debate to give you leeway as to which direction you wish to take the debate. The modified paragraph begins:

"Being that I have given my opponent options concerning authoritative sources in this debate, if he wishes to propose a modification of the resolution of the debate…"

If you choose to modify the resolution before the debate begins, I could change the the title of the debate and my Round 1 post to match your resolution. Another option would be for me to cancel this debate and you challenge me with your resolution. If you do so, please
1) Organize the debate in your Round 1 post (Round 1: Acceptance; Round 2: Opening Arguments; Round 3: Rebuttals; Round 4: Response to Rebuttals/Conclusion)
2) Keep it at 4 rounds
3) Define the terms of the resolution in Round 1
4) Use bold print for titles ("Resolution" "Definition of Terms" "Organization of Debate" etc.)
Thank you
Posted by VocMusTcrMaloy 3 years ago
VocMusTcrMaloy
Should be a good debate!
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 2 years ago
SuperRobotWars
VocMusTcrMaloyVirgil.CainTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited an round and never actually posted an argument.
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 2 years ago
RoyLatham
VocMusTcrMaloyVirgil.CainTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not give any reasons, forfeited.
Vote Placed by F-16_Fighting_Falcon 2 years ago
F-16_Fighting_Falcon
VocMusTcrMaloyVirgil.CainTied
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 Checkmark--1 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: Pro made a spelling mistake while Con made none. Pro provided no argument, neither side used any sources.
Vote Placed by thett3 2 years ago
thett3
VocMusTcrMaloyVirgil.CainTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:40 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Man-is-good 2 years ago
Man-is-good
VocMusTcrMaloyVirgil.CainTied
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: Con wins due to Pro's forfeit in two of the debate's rounds. However, neither sides provided sources, and were even in terms of spelling and grammar. Consequently, I am obliged to give Con only points for conduct and the more convincing argument [since Pro provided none whatsoever].