The Instigator
Samson
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Kingjames
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Killing animals must be illegalised

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  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/26/2010 Category: Society
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,730 times Debate No: 13792
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (8)
Votes (8)

 

Samson

Pro

Human beings are also animals hence killing another animal becomes murder
Kingjames

Con

No there should not. There are some animals that act out in very wild behaviors and they are uncontrollable, so what are you going to do about it, the animal is stronger which puts them in a higher position. For example the whale that attacked its owner some months ago, that whale should be put to death no matter what, the whale was trained and still acted out and deceived its fellow fans by acting out on its trainer, therefore it should pay the consequence of being put to death
Debate Round No. 1
Samson

Pro

You say the whale should pay the consequences? That means it should be judged like human beings thus going back to my point they should be punished in the same way that people are convicted and sentenced to jail. 2nd most animals are becoming extinct because of our selfish motive. Its better we illegalise animal slaughter.
Kingjames

Con

My opponent says that animals are becoming extinct, the only animals that are becoming extinct is the polar bears. No humans are not like animals. Do we chase our tails, are we put on a leash, are we in a jungle NO. Yes we started as animals but now we are not animals, animals dont go to work, they dont go to school, animals are completely different from humans, animals should be punished for their behaviors. We are aslo punished for our behaviors too.
Debate Round No. 2
Samson

Pro

Yes humans are animals anyone would know that. You even admited that we started as animals. If today was some milion years ago we would be killing each other. Indeed we dont chase our tails, monkes too dont chase their tails. Indeed we dont live in a jungle, to the animals london is a jungle to them. Indeed animals dont work, but eagles go hunting for their young ones. Call a zebra an animal, zebras also see us as animals. Conclusion we are all animals with different lifestyles, mentality, abilities and appearence. Thus killing your dog is killing a fellow inocent animal and is MURDER!
Kingjames

Con

Im not saying we should just randomly kill animals, if your animal bitterly ate you, wouldnt you want that animal dead. I mean I would. Monkeys are very nice but at the same time they can be deadly, and depending on the crime they should be put to death. Murder is not what that is, murder is when you deliberately kill somone without no legitament reason
Debate Round No. 3
8 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Posted by IFoundWaldo 6 years ago
IFoundWaldo
Killing animals isn't illegal. We kill animals every day as humans. By accident whilst driving our cars, on purpose for food.. And if Animals aren't killed, there would be over-population and then, everyone would die from sickness and disease. Do you want that, Pro side? Is that what you want? The end of life on Earth as we know it? Shame! Shame on you!
Posted by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
Horrible debate. May neither of you be awarded any points, and may G-d have mercy on your souls...
Posted by TheReformedChristian 6 years ago
TheReformedChristian
The problem I see with pro's arguement is that regardless even if we made a law forbidding the killing of Animals they would kill each other regardless its in their biology they act on instinict. To try and put animals above humans is a fallacy of equivication. an animal really has no moral concept of right and wrong as opposed to a human. Now according to pro's logic should we also outlaw the eating of animals? since humans eat meat to live. The only way I see to ending the killing of animals is to lock them away but thats not going to happen because it will then put humanity in danger.
Posted by Zilla2112 6 years ago
Zilla2112
This is one of the worst debates I've ever seen on this site.
Posted by Seamalicous 6 years ago
Seamalicous
the fact that the con said that the only animals becoming 'is polar bears' and will probably still win is an exemplification of how poorly the Pro made his arguments.
Posted by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
Pro had the burden of proof, and I couldn't figure out exactly what he was trying to say. Pro's opening argument should have included examples with arguments to make his point.

I think Pro's argument is that in the grand scheme of things, animals should be viewed as morally equal to people. However, animals kill for food and to aggressively defend territory and so forth. So if people and animals are morally equivalent, then people must be allowed to kill indiscriminately as animals do. The debate was haphazard, but with Pro having the burden of proof, Con had the better of it.

I think spelling and grammar errors in the resolution count more than in the rest of the debate. The is no word "illegalised." Use "made illegal."
Posted by losedotexe 6 years ago
losedotexe
Also, this debate reminds me of trollface.jpg.
If this was a legitimate debate...sigh.
Posted by losedotexe 6 years ago
losedotexe
the term is criminalized ; not illegalized.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by Elmakai 6 years ago
Elmakai
SamsonKingjamesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by IFoundWaldo 6 years ago
IFoundWaldo
SamsonKingjamesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Aaronroy 6 years ago
Aaronroy
SamsonKingjamesTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
SamsonKingjamesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Zilla2112 6 years ago
Zilla2112
SamsonKingjamesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Koopin 6 years ago
Koopin
SamsonKingjamesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by RoyLatham 6 years ago
RoyLatham
SamsonKingjamesTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by Erick 6 years ago
Erick
SamsonKingjamesTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03