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

JCats should be treated like regular cats.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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: 6/8/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 886 times Debate No: 34533
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (6)
Votes (1)




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.



I thank my opponent for this debate.

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 [1]
fan - A person who has a strong interest in or admiration for a particular sport, art or entertainment form, or famous person [2].
feline - A cat or other member of the cat family [3].

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 [4]. 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.

Thank you,

Debate Round No. 1


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.


There are a few things I need to bring up this round.

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.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
6 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Posted by KingDebater 2 years ago
Also, this debate was last updated 7 months ago, and there have been no links to it since. So, were you digging through my old debates or searching "JCats"?
Posted by KingDebater 2 years ago
Were you rooting for me to win this debate?

Posted by PeriodicPatriot 2 years ago
I am a fan of Union J.
Posted by Mr.Blasty 3 years ago
I knew there was something weird going on here...
Posted by KingDebater 3 years ago
You do realise this is (like all of my recent debates) a joke debate? I'm sorry if I didn't make it clear enough.
Posted by wolfman4711 3 years ago
No one knows what that is
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
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.