Is Christine O'Donnell A Witch?
| Started: | 5/23/2011 | Category: | News |
| Updated: | 1 year ago | Status: | Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 930 times | Debate No: | 16658 |
 Pro During the 2010 U.S. Senate special election in Delaware, Christian O’Donnell released this hypnotically mesmerizing video: She claims not to be a witch. This is exactly what a witch would say, as not to arouse suspicion. To which, I will be arguing that Christine O’Donnell is a witch. First, who is Christine O’ Donnell? Well, she’s an American Republican politician. But she claims that I’m nothing that she’s ever heard. She’s not perfect. She not a witch. But most importantly, she’s you… Next, what is a witch? The Merriam-Webster Dictionary and Thesaurus defines witch as 1. A person believed to have supernatural powers; 2. An ugly old hag; 3. A charming or alluring girl or woman. I can’t prove that Christine O’ Donnell has supernatural powers, since they are beyond the scope of empirical or qualitative testing. Nor can I demonstrate that she is ‘ugly’ or even ‘old’; these subjective-laden terms are arbitrary and relative. Yet a witch need not be an ugly, old hag by anyone standard, nor be female, nor need she (or he) have supernatural powers. Most witches are pagan who practice in earth-based herbal medicines and remedies – charms. But is she charming? Christine O’ Donnell is not one of those stereotypical witches that wears a pointy hat while riding on a broomstick at night. However, she many be a witch through certain natural powers she posses. The power of suggestion is a strong, yet subtle, form of hypnosis, in that, if successful, a person could guide the thoughts, feelings and behaviors of another, putting them in a trance. This can be called ‘charming’ and ‘alluring’. It’s no accident that Christine O’ Donnell’s political ad turned out the way it did. The close up on her face. The words. The tone. The facial expression. All used manipulatively in order to illicit a certain response. Yet what response does she want? She wants you to react the same way you would if you were her. And she would vote for herself. But how would she be able to convince thousand of voters to vote for her? Simple: by hypnotizing them, charming them, alluring them, into believing that she is us and thus we are her. If successful, she would have been voted in. Clearly, she was not a successful witch, or a politician. Had she been successful, had she been elected, she would have forcefully attacked the separation between church and state, in a mastermind plan to institute witch covens under the guises of churches. Still, she has made remarkable strides in the advancement of witches for politics. Supposedly, Glenda will run as the “Good Candidate” in ’14, while Voldemort will again run in ’12 for the Republican vote, in the absence of any decent Republican candidates. Again. Thank you. Source: Christine O’ Donnell: http://en.wikipedia.org...'Donnell#2010  Con You say that Mrs. O' Donnell may be refuting the fact that she is a witch simply to avoid suspicion, but this makes little sense to me. If she is a witch (and I'm working under the assumption that by 'witch', we mean a practitioner of a paganistic religion, and not someone with supernatural powers or someone who is very charming), why would she deny it? I see no reason for her to hide the fact that she is a witch. You also stated that you believe she was attempting to 'hypnotize' the voters into voting for her, and that once in office, she would attack the separation if church and state. I would like to refute both of these claims: 1. I think you greatly misunderstand what it means to be a witch. You are trying to make connections between being a witch and being clever, charming, and almost deceitful. This is not what a witch is. My aunt and uncle are witches, and they are normal people, just like you and me. Simply because one is a witch doesn't give them any powers of persuasion that the rest if us do not have. I don't see how she could 'hypnotize' enough voters to vote for her that she would win an election. 2. I'm not sure I follow you're point about her attacking the separation of church and state, do you mean she would attempt to abolish it? Please elaborate and I will continue this debate when I make my round 2 arguments. Thank you. |
 |
|
Pro I thank and welcome my opponent to the debate, in determining whether or not Christine O’ Donnell is a witch… Second, she would have to deny being a witch to avoid persecution. We are all aware of the Salem witch-hunts and trials during 1692, from learning about this in our history classes in grade school. However, how many of us are aware of the more obscure fact, that in 1787 a mob hunted a young female only suspected of being a witch. Unlike Christine O’Donnell, it was unclear that she even dabble in the black arts. Where in America did this happen? Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Where was Christine O’ Donnell born? Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. Could she be the ancestors of that poor young woman? I don’t know. But we all know how backwards the Christian population is in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania. I’m afraid that if they found out that she was a witch, they’d try to do something terrible. The Philadelphians are ruthless in their quest to destroy all witches. Could it be that, for her own safety, she had to deny her true self, that of a witch, to avoid persecution? Also, it’s not that all witches are against the separation of church and state. Some are not. But Christine O’Donnell is. She clearly has been on the record, questioning whether or not the church and state must be separated:
She wants to tear down this “wall” of separation in order to institute covens. Indeed, I have no doubt that she would have forcefully reinterpreted to ”bring back the old time religions” as spoken by her master, Merlin (who was a wizard) – a task that he could accomplish when he secretly tried to overthrow America during the British Invasion of 1812 to become King of America (musically documented by 14th rock-minstrel Gary Hughes):
Why would she want to instate covens? To fulfill the ritual that she neglected to years ago: join a coven and make it official:
Christine O’ Donnell is a witch. Did she say in the clip “was a witch”? Yes. She had to lie. She would sacrifice Ann Frank to Hitler; she would lie to the American public, to avoid persecution. She is a witch. Not unlike the good witches, such as your aunt, uncle, and Glenda. Thank you. Con You attempt to make connections between the Salem witchtrials and Christine O'Donnell denying that she is a witch. This is congruent to someone saying that they are not Jewish to avoid persecution by the Nazis. While I agree that people are definitely still judged by things such as their skin color and religion, it is no where near severe enough to warrant someone lying about their religion in order to be elected to a position in the government. Could it not be possible that when she says she was a witch, but isn't anymore, it's because she was a witch, but isn't anymore? Where is the proof that she is morally corrupt? You seem to have a negative bias toward pagans. You said that witches can be good people, but anytime you call her a bad person, you allude to your belief that she is a witch. Do you really believe that because she is a witch, she has the ability to hypnotize thousands of people? That seems like a stereotype to me. And if she truly is against the separation of church and state, that does not indicate that she is a witch, merely that she doesnt have a clear understanding of the contents of the U.S. Constitution. |
 |
| jar2187 | Doritosguy93 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - |  | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 7 |
| jar2187 | Doritosguy93 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | | - | - | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | | - | - | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | | - | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 7 | 0 |
| jar2187 | Doritosguy93 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | - | | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | - | | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 0 | 3 |
| jar2187 | Doritosguy93 | Tied | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Agreed with before the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Agreed with after the debate: | - | - | | 0 points |
| Who had better conduct: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Had better spelling and grammar: | - | - | | 1 point |
| Made more convincing arguments: | | - | - | 3 points |
| Used the most reliable sources: | - | | - | 2 points |
| Total points awarded: | 3 | 2 |