The Instigator
Agnostic_Meatatarian
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
dairygirl4u2c
Con (against)
Losing
3 Points

It is not rape when a women consents under the influence

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 4 votes the winner is...
Agnostic_Meatatarian
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/21/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 688 times Debate No: 59292
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (4)

 

Agnostic_Meatatarian

Pro

I will show using logic that it is not rape if a women consents to sex while drunk.
dairygirl4u2c

Con

pro didn't argue "it is sometimes not rape..." his statement is basically another way of saying it is never rape when a woman consents under the influence.

if a woman is drunk off her goard and the man is not drunk, he could be taking advantage of her, and that would be rape.

if they are both drunk, perhaps it isn't.

pro might argue it isn't rape given she 'consents', and rape is 'unconsentual', as a play on definitions. but according to elgal definitions, the definitionis most important here, a woman can be raped while drunk, even though while drunk she consents
Debate Round No. 1
Agnostic_Meatatarian

Pro

Rape

1. The act of seizing and carrying away by force; violent seizure; robbery.

2. Sexxual connection with with a woman without her consent.

As you can see by the very definition of rape if she consnts then she is not being raped regardless if she is drunk or not. Someones personal opinion doesn't change the definition of what rape is.
dairygirl4u2c

Con

as i predicted, pro argued about semantical definitions.

accoding to legal definitions, though, rape can include drunken consent too.

as even pro argued, yes, one's opinion's and such do not count much against these objective definiitions.
Debate Round No. 2
Agnostic_Meatatarian

Pro

Well the question is why is one definition better then the other? You must choose either one or the other as they can't be both, which is correct or not is soley based on opinion as you have to choose one or the other. My argument was that by definition consenting while drunk is not rape and I proved that correct with the actual definition that I spoke of. Now if we are considering it to be rape if the person regrets it later then why is it not rape when anyone regardless of there soberness is not considered a rape victim when they regret there decision at a later time?
dairygirl4u2c

Con

when people who aren't drunk later regret sex, that just goes bad judgment on their part. it doesn't show an inability to truly consent because they are drunk. it doesn't show that someoen took advantage o their drunkenness.

as even con said, we have to look past the definitions and look at the reasons for them and such.

the reasons are as i said in the initial post by me. one can't always consent fully when htey are druk, and others can take advantage of them.

legal defniitions in this case are clearly superior to every day definitions provided by con, and they better resonate with good sensiblityies.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Agnostic_Meatatarian 3 years ago
Agnostic_Meatatarian
Could you clarify what you mean?
Posted by near 3 years ago
near
All types, methods and nature of sex that is not consensual is rape.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by FuzzyCatPotato 3 years ago
FuzzyCatPotato
Agnostic_Meatatariandairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: pls use caps sometimes. Consent under the influence has not sufficiently been proven to be "true" consent, Pro has BOP.
Vote Placed by dynamicduodebaters 3 years ago
dynamicduodebaters
Agnostic_Meatatariandairygirl4u2cTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: spelling is painfull
Vote Placed by t-man 3 years ago
t-man
Agnostic_Meatatariandairygirl4u2cTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's spelling was atrocious. Neither sides made very good arguments.
Vote Placed by rings48 3 years ago
rings48
Agnostic_Meatatariandairygirl4u2cTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: No real sources, no conduct issues. Con doesn't seem to have a shift key on her keyboard. Without evidence of differences or sources to back either claims, neither can win argument.