JCats should be treated like regular cats.
Debate Rounds (2)
JCats, fans of Union J, are often treated as if they are superior to other species of cats - with the way they're treated you'd think they're human. There's no reason why they deserve such good treatment, they're just like any other dumb feline.
They get to eat human food, be accepted into human schools and even not being subjected to uncomfortable collars and patronizing nicknames, such as 'Tiddles' and 'Mr. Pickle Wickle'.
So that's what I'd like to debate today, whether JCats should be treated like regular cats. I hope for a good debate.
I thank you.
A quick set of definitions before beginning.
JCats - Fans of the musical group, Union J (as defined by my opponent in his R1)
Union J - A British boy band 
fan - A person who has a strong interest in or admiration for a particular sport, art or entertainment form, or famous person .
feline - A cat or other member of the cat family .
I will now begin with my arguments
1) Human rights
We can extrapolate basic human rights from our own self ownership, which can be shown by Hoppe . From this, all things capable of rational thought and self awareness are persons and have those rights. Since cats are not capable of rational thought and self awareness, they are not allowed rights, while the fans of Union J are. Because of this, "JCats" should not be treated like regular cats.
I thank Con for accepting this debate
Judging by the extremely unpleasent and dead stupid musical preferences of a JCat, we can conclude that they are not capable of rational thought. Have you ever heard of a scientist that was a JCat? No, precisely, because they're not capable of rational thought.
So what species is a JCat, and what species should we treat a JCat like? Well, seeing as they're definitely not human, it seems fair and reasonable to assume and treat them like cats, seeing as that's their name. That would make sense. The resolution hath been affirmed, hurrah!
I thank you.
1) My opponent makes the claim that the music is terrible, however, he does not provide any evidence for this claim, not even a sample of the music for us to make the determination. As such, this is an unsubstantiated claim.
2) My opponent then claims that this makes those listeners a different species. This is, of course, a logical fallacy. While it may potentially indicate that they lack reasoning and so lack personhood and the rigs associated. They are still genetically people and members of our species.
Let my finish by pointing out that my opponent has not presented even a sample of this terrible music nor any sources to back up any of his claims.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
|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||2|
Reasons for voting decision: I should not have had to wait for con to provide basic definitions, to understand what the debate was about... However as it annoyed me too much, voting on more than that would be biased.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.