Jesus was a conservative.
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 6 votes the winner is...
1dustpelt
| Started: | 5/7/2012 | Category: | Politics |
| Updated: | 1 year ago | Status: | Post Voting Period |
| Viewed: | 749 times | Debate No: | 23456 |
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (5)
Votes (6)
 Pro  Con "He helped the poor without one government program." Liberals can do that. "He healed the sick without a government health care system." Liberals can do that. "He feed the hungry without food stamps." Liberals can do that. "He was killed by a liberal court." No, he was killed by a ultra-conservative extremist court. Exactly the opposite. Why Jesus was not conservative Contention 1: He was against the conservative priests Several times throughout the Bible he preached against the conservative priests. Vote CON as PRO made no good arguments. |
 |
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by TUF 1 year ago
| TAA | 1dustpelt | 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 |
Reasons for voting decision: Con refuted everything perfectly. I lolled
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 1 year ago
| TAA | 1dustpelt | 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: | 2 | 4 |
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct - tied. Spelling and grammar - Pro said, "He feed the hungry..." Arguments - Con demonstrated the fatal flaw with all of Pro's arguments: that the canons of human decency function regardless of liberal or conservative political affiliation; therefore, rendering Pro's arguments impotent. Sources - Pro used the most reliable and reputable source known throughout the land: the rambling of a pizza salesman, Herman Cain.
Vote Placed by Contra 1 year ago
| TAA | 1dustpelt | 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 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: CON's arguments prevailed. However, both arguments sucked though. Just because "liberals can do that" doesn't make Jesus liberal (although I believe he was).
Vote Placed by cheesedingo1 1 year ago
| TAA | 1dustpelt | 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 | 2 |
Reasons for voting decision: only voting to counter lordknuckle.
Vote Placed by royalpaladin 1 year ago
| TAA | 1dustpelt | 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 |
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were superior. Most of Pro's ideas were nonunique, and Con demonstrated that Jesus was against the conservative Jewish priests. Adding points to counter LK. Please counter 2 more points of LK's vote.
Vote Placed by Lordknukle 1 year ago
| TAA | 1dustpelt | 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: | 6 | 0 |
Reasons for voting decision: It's rather axiomatic in the sense of when talking about a liberal, government intervention is presumed. TAA showed that he did things without government intervention and actually had a source. Con's argument was completely unsubstantiated and lacking from the mainstream definition of "liberal," which was obvious by the opening post.
COUNTER VOTE BOMB CONTRA- +3 POINTS TO TAA
The court was not conservative
Never mind, dustpelt your arguments are false. :P