The Instigator
yomama12
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
wildcat101
Con (against)
Winning
5 Points

Kennedy and Lincoln's assassination are linked in mysterious ways.

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 2 votes the winner is...
wildcat101
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/31/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 718 times Debate No: 51281
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (0)
Votes (2)

 

yomama12

Pro

John F. Kennedy and Abraham Lincoln's assassinations are linked in mysterious ways, and i don't think it's a coincidence.
wildcat101

Con

Thank you for this chance to debate this topic with you. I do not believe that the two assassinations can possibly be connected due to the period of time between the two events. This looks closer to a "history repeats itself" kind of thing.
Debate Round No. 1
yomama12

Pro

you may think that, but why exactly are the assassinations linked 100 years apart from each other? Lincoln's being in 1863, Kennedy's being in 1963. And lets not forget that both of them were elected as Presidents 100 years apart too! Lincoln's: 1860. Kennedy's:1960. And after both of them were assassinated, they were both succeeded by men who's last names were Johnson. And that both of their wives were there to witness the assassination. I still have plenty more facts to go

Source:

http://www.snopes.com...

you'll understand most of the "coincidences" if you read through the whole thing.
wildcat101

Con

All that proves is that someone was a history fanatic that wanted to recreate Kennedy's assassination. Also, Lincoln was killed in a theatre, Kennedy in a motorcade in Dallas. I will use a quote from the same source as you did that refutes any connections, no matter how amazing they may seem. "You could take any two famous people and find a number of similar-type coincidences between them." [1] I want to see how you respond to this before I continue, as I do not see any proof coming from you other than a website filled with a list of similarities that could happen to anyone. Especially when some of those similarities are not actually yet proven.
1: http://www.school-for-champions.com...
Debate Round No. 2
yomama12

Pro

that doesn't explain why both of the assassinators were both assassinated themselves before trial. Or that Kennedy and Lincoln were elected into congress and beacame Presidents 100 years before and after each other.

Source:

http://voices.yahoo.com...
wildcat101

Con

Events all happen because they happen. Their is a reason everything happens. Yet, just because something may seem way too similar to be just a coincidence does not mean that the two things are connected. I will bring up the point of the Bible and the similarities throughout history that seem to correspond with the Bible. Now, I am a Christian, but I am able to see that not everything is as it seems, or rather, what we want it to seem. It (the theory that the assassinations are connected) actually sounds like, the more I read into it, that it is almost like the person stricken with paranoia, therefore believing that everyone is out to get them. Except, though, in this case it is actually people who want to create something more of the two events, because it would make the two events that much more significant.
Debate Round No. 3
yomama12

Pro

Some may be coincidences, but that doesn't mean they didn't happen for a purpose
wildcat101

Con

That, my friend, is only a theory, and theories are not always concrete. Also you have not rubtted my argument except to say that these may not be just coincidences. If you wish to win this debate, you might want to do a little more debating, and less theorizing. I am just saying that it might help.
Debate Round No. 4
yomama12

Pro

Well, i am not stricken with paranoia, that is a fact. But it is also a fact that, somehow, these two "coincidences" are connected. It's funny, really. That two of the most tragic events in American history can be connected like this. Most people think this too. I am Christian as well, but just because not evrything goes with the bible, doesn't mean that these two "coincidences" aren't connected in some way. And, by the way my friend, if you want people to root for you, I would at least use a couple more links, or even a video, to prove your point. I await my opponent's response
wildcat101

Con

http://youtu.be...
There is a video for you. It takes some of the "connections" that you mentioned, and proves why they are wrong. Kind of puts a hole in your argument, doesn't it? Well, I have enjoyed this debate, and I urge the voters to vote for me, as you cannot see similarities and think they are connected. It just leads to paranoia. By the way, I was not saying that my opponent had paranoia, I was just comparing situations.
Debate Round No. 5
No comments have been posted on this debate.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
yomama12wildcat101Tied
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 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: S&P- Pro needed to punctuate better but Con had a few spelling errors. Sources- Con used better sources as yahoo voices isn't the most reliable.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
yomama12wildcat101Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro doesn't mean his burden of proof. To say that there are some strangely round numerical similarities between the years in which they became president and the years in which they died is not enough, nor is the fact that the presidents following them had "Johnson" as they last name. It's a pretty common name. The fact that their wives happened to be present represents nothing more than coincidence. And neither does the fact that the assassins themselves were killed before trial - people tend to get upset when you kill their president. Con appears to have done the bare minimum to refute this, but it's Pro's responsibility in this debate to provide substantive reasoning as to why there is a strong link between the two, and not just coincidence in the number of years separating them or a few of the details involved. If they're linked, that means that there's something behind both of them that unites them. I don't see evidence of that, therefore I give presumption to Con.