The Instigator
vmpire321
Pro (for)
Losing
8 Points
The Contender
Contra
Con (against)
Winning
9 Points

MIG'S TOURNY: Contradiction Debate

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 6 votes the winner is...
Contra
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/23/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,342 times Debate No: 24830
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (6)

 

vmpire321

Pro

This is for round 4 of Man-is-good's tournament.

The rules:

1) In Rounds 1-3, CON will ask PRO 10 Yes/No questions.
2) In Rounds 2-4, PRO will answer all of CON's questions with Yes, No, or an explanation as to why neither answer would be completely correct.
3) In Rounds 2-4, CON can point out any contradictions that he or she believes to be present in PRO's answers, citing all questions and answers involved in the contradiction. No new contradictions may be pointed out in Round 5.
4) When CON points out a contradiction, PRO may use all of the following rounds to defend the accused contradiction until either CON drops the accusation or PRO admits defeat, or when the debate is over.
5) If PRO is never found to have contradicted himself in this debate, PRO wins.
6) If PRO is ever found to have contradicted himself in this debate, PRO loses.
7) It is still important that debaters back up their arguments with sources when appropriate.
8) A contradiction may only be pointed out if both parts of the contradiction are brought up in this debate.
9) For any questions involved in a contradiction, the first definition of the word from the online Merriam Webster dictionary will be taken.
10) If PRO ever fails to abide by any rule, PRO automatically loses.
11) If CON ever fails to abide by any rule, CON automatically loses.
A contradiction is basically when a person says one thing then later states his position later in a varying way (basically what we think Contradiction is).
Contra

Con


I accept, and now present my questions:

1) Do you support President Obama on the jobs situation? If not, why not?

2) Do you support the death penalty, because it justifiably executes those who are severe criminals? (at least most of the time!)

3) Should we have universal health care?

4) Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. True or False (if false, say who was responsible).

5) Do you support small government?

6) Should unions be able to influence elections?

7) Do you support the Patriot Act?

8) Do you want more tax cuts for the wealthy?

9) Do you think that liberals should stop shredding our Constitution and honor the framework of our country?

10) Do you support the War on Terror, which includes actions such as the Iraqi "War", "War" in Afghanistan, and the "Patriot" Act? (quotation marks voluntarily added)


I anxiously await your responses!
Debate Round No. 1
vmpire321

Pro

1) Do you support President Obama on the jobs situation? If not, why not?

No, since it doesn't seem like he's been doing a good job.

2) Do you support the death penalty, because it justifiably executes those who are severe criminals? (at least most of the time!)

Yes

3) Should we have universal health care?

No

4) Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11. True or False (if false, say who was responsible).

Yes (True)


5) Do you support small government?

Yes (In the economy)

6) Should unions be able to influence elections?

Yes

7) Do you support the Patriot Act?

Yes

8) Do you want more tax cuts for the wealthy?

No, taxes are fine right now.

9) Do you think that liberals should stop shredding our Constitution and honor the framework of our country?

No

10) Do you support the War on Terror, which includes actions such as the Iraqi "War", "War" in Afghanistan, and the "Patriot" Act? (quotation marks voluntarily added)

Yes


Contra

Con

I ask that my opponent waits until Friday to post her/his argument, because I won't be back until Saturday to respond. Thanks in advance.

-----Further Questions------


1) Do you acknowledge the fact that Obama inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression when he entered office? [1]


2) Do you support freedom and small government when it comes to social issues?


3) Should Obama get credit for getting Osama bin Laden?


4) Should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others who work hard?


5) Did you agree with Obama's main actions with dealing with Libya (providing support to rebels to take down the tyrannical dictator).


6) Do you consider yourself to be pro-life, meaning you support life and oppose any measures to reduce it (euthanasia, etc).


7) We must protect fetuses and go to great lengths to do so. Do you agree? (no tricks here)


8) Killing is wrong. Do you agree or disagree?


9) Do you support stem cell research?


10) Should we have a strong wall separating church and state?











[1] http://money.cnn.com...
Debate Round No. 2
vmpire321

Pro

1) Do you acknowledge the fact that Obama inherited the worst economy since the Great Depression when he entered office? [1]

Yes


2) Do you support freedom and small government when it comes to social issues?

No


3) Should Obama get credit for getting Osama bin Laden?

No


4) Should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others who work hard?

Yes


5) Did you agree with Obama's main actions with dealing with Libya (providing support to rebels to take down the tyrannical dictator).

No


6) Do you consider yourself to be pro-life, meaning you support life and oppose any measures to reduce it (euthanasia, etc).

Yes

7) We must protect fetuses and go to great lengths to do so. Do you agree? (no tricks here)

Yes

8) Killing is wrong. Do you agree or disagree?

Yes/No. It depends on who's doing the killing and what for.


9) Do you support stem cell research?

No


10) Should we have a strong wall separating church and state?

No
Contra

Con

I ask my opponent to wait until Tuesday to post their argument, or Monday, as I will not be back to present an argument until Tuesday.

-----Contradictions So Far-----


1) Pro-Life Contradiction

Pro says that he is "pro-life." But Pro also says that he "opposes stem cell research." Which, would've if developed more vigourously, saved many thousands or even more lives. A contradiction.

2) Obama vs Osama Responsibility

Pro agrees that "Osama bin Laden was responsible for 9/11". However, he thinks that "Obama shouldn't get any credit for the death of Osama bin Laden", because all he did was order to carry out the attacks, which is exactly what Osama bin Laden did. A contradiction.

3) Pro-Life and Protecting Life

Pro says he is "pro-life", but at a different point says he is opposed to the formation of "universal health care." Providing pregnant women with medical care and proper nutrition, which would reduce infant mortality is thus pro-life, and Pro being against it is a contradiction of his "pro life" stance.

4) Pro-Life and Death Penalty

Pro says he is "pro-life" but also says that he is "supportive of the death penalty." Killing someone is absolutely against being not "pro-life", an outright contradiction.

5) War

Once again, Pro says he is "pro-life", but says that he "supports the War on Terror, including actions such as the War in Iraq". The War in Iraq has killed countless children, thus not being pro-life. A contradiction of being "pro-life".


Questions

1) Do you want a stronger economy (more jobs, GDP, etc.)?


2) Do you think the U.S. was right to invade Iraq to overthrow Hussein?


3) Do you support the estate/ inheritance tax(es)?


4) Should gov't interfere with people's personal private lives?


5) Should people have freedom to worship and freedom of religion?


6) Do you think it is okay that Muslims are creating Mosques in America?


7) Do you think we should continue Pell Grants and college opportunity programs?


8) Do you agree with Romney's position that we should cut taxes to stimulate the economy?


9) Do you support Obama or Romney?


10) Do you identify with the anti abortion activists who use force or even violence to stop abortion clinics from operating?

Debate Round No. 3
vmpire321

Pro

==Contradictions==

Prolife

Con has apparently misunderstood me when I stated that I was pro-life. The stance "pro-life" refers to my disaproval of abortion [1]. It can also refer to an opposition towards stem-cell research and euthanasia [1]. Hence, I am not contradicting myself when I say I am pro-life and against stem cell research.

Obama vs Osama

In this contradiction, my opponent is literally putting words into my mouth. I never stated that "Obama shouldn't get credit for the death of Osama, because he only carried out orders." Instead, I think that Obama doesn't deserve credit since his opponent (Mitt Romney and many others) would have done the same.

Pro-life and protecting life

Once again, pro-life means that I'm against abortion and I believe a fetus has the right to life. Forcing people to buy health care is something different.

Pro-Life and the Death Penalty

Ultimately, the death penalty saves more lives than it kills through deterence. Killing someone can be justified if it saves more lives. This is also another misuse of the term "pro-life".

War

The War on Terror is to protect Americans, or in other words to save lives. My opponent once again abuses the term "pro-life."

==Questions==

1) Do you want a stronger economy (more jobs, GDP, etc.)?

Yes, I want the strongest possible economy.

2) Do you think the U.S. was right to invade Iraq to overthrow Hussein?

Yes

3) Do you support the estate/ inheritance tax(es)?

No

4) Should gov't interfere with people's personal private lives?

This question is rather vague. Yes to more social issues, no towards more economic issues.

5) Should people have freedom to worship and freedom of religion?

Yes

6) Do you think it is okay that Muslims are creating Mosques in America?

Yes

7) Do you think we should continue Pell Grants and college opportunity programs?

No

8) Do you agree with Romney's position that we should cut taxes to stimulate the economy?

Yes

9) Do you support Obama or Romney?

Yes

10) Do you identify with the anti abortion activists who use force or even violence to stop abortion clinics from operating?

If you mean "To associate or affiliate (oneself) closely with a person or group[2]", then no.




Sources:
[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
Contra

Con

Contradictions


1) Obama and Osama

I asked "should Obama get credit for getting Osama bin Laden." Pro said no. I also asked "[was] Osama bin Laden responsible for 9/11?" Pro said yes.

Basically, even though both of them (Obama and Osama) just ordered an operation, the same kind of procedural motion, Pro says that Osama should get credit, but Obama should not, even though ultimately they both just gave an executive order to carry out an operation. It is a contradiction then if one guy who ordered out an operation should get credit, but another guy who ordered an operation to go forward shouldn't get credit.

Contradiction.


2) Pro-Life confusion

Pro has said that he is "pro-life". However he also said he was in support of "the death penalty", the "war in Iraq", "opposed to stem cell research", and "against stem cell research".

However, "pro" means in favor. Life means, well, human being life. You CANNOT be "pro life" and favor killing people through state power (death penalty). To compare it, it's like if I say I am pro-small government, because I support less gov't in the economy, even though I am supportive of a big brother, large gov't in social lives. You just can't honestly say that.

"We should invade a country and end up killing thousands of people!"
"The state should execute criminals in some cases!"
"Stem cell research is immoral and wrong!"
"Universal health care, which would save 45,000 lives annually [1], is WRONG!"

-----I am pro-life. What?

I will let the voters decide if this is a contradiction or not. If I say I am pro-veteran, then privatize and decrease their benefits, I am not pro-veteran.


3) Work for a Living

My question: "Do you support the inheritance/ estate taxes?" Pro says "no." I ask if he supports the notion that "should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others?" Pro says "yes."

If a person on welfare doesn't earn their money and just uses the handouts, Pro thinks they should have to earn their money and not rely on others. If a lazy heir just uses their parent's money, Pro thinks that she should. So, some people can rely on others (their parents) but others cannot? Contradiction.


4) Dictators

Pro thinks that we were right to "invade Iraq and overthrow Hussein." However, Pro disagrees with Obama's action to help rebels overthrow a Libyan dictator. They were both tyrannical dictators who oppressed their people. This is a contradiction.


5) Taxes

Pro says in R2 that "we shouldn't cut taxes for the rich" because "taxes are fine right now." However in R4 Pro says that he "agrees with Mitt Romney that we should cut taxes". A contradiction.


#Rule Violation

In R4 Pro did not answer my question 9 properly. I asked "do you support Obama or Romney?" Pro responded with "yes". I don't really understand, but I assume he supports Romney.


[1] http://www.reuters.com...
Debate Round No. 4
vmpire321

Pro

==Contradictions==

Obama and Osama

There is a crucial difference between fault and credit. Both of them are at fault for their actions, but Osama did something that normal people wouldn't do, as he is a terrorist. On the other hand, many smart politicians would have attemped something similar to Obama. Osama did something many people wouldn't do. Obama did something many people would do. Osama gets credit; Obama doesn't.

Pro-life

Well, my opponent is continuing to try and twist the definition of "pro-life".
Merriam Webster states that pro-life is "opposed to abortion [1]"

The Free Dictionary defines pro-life as "Advocating the legal protection of human embyos and fetuses, especially by favoring the outlawing of abortion on the ground that it is the taking of a human life. [2]"

No where in any definition does it state that I have to absolutely value human life over anything else. Being "pro-life" doesn't mean I only have that as my only standard in life. On the other hand, people have many things that they value, and as for me I might value certain things over my "pro-life" stance. This is another flaw in my opponent's question and analysis.

Once again, the death penalty saves lives through deterrance and punishes inhumane criminals.
The War in Iraq help to improve human rights there, ultimately giving more value and meaning to some lives.
Being "pro-life" doesn't contradict my stance that stem cell research is immoral.
Rights should be valued over life, and universal health care forces people to buy certain things. This is an abuse of power.

Work for a living

Not all people get their inheritance free, as they still have to take care of their aging parents. Furthermore, inheritance taxes isn't exactly that well of a method to seperate heirs from their money.

Dictators

My opponent is somewhat correct - I disagree with Obama's action. However, I'm completely fine with his target, a Libyan dictator.

Taxes

When I stated that taxes are fine right now, I was referring to the rich. There is no need to give the rich even more tax cuts. On the other hands, some taxes should be cut.

#Rule Violation

I'm sorry, I read your question as "Do you support either Obama or Romney?" Anyways, it's pretty obvious that I would rather have Romney in office than Obama.

This seems like a rule violation on your part, primarly rule 1:
"1) In Rounds 1-3, CON will ask PRO 10 Yes/No questions."

Your question: "Do you support Obama or Romney?" is not a yes/no question.



Sources:

[1] http://www.merriam-webster.com...
[2] http://www.thefreedictionary.com...
Contra

Con

== Contradictions ==


1) Obama and Osama


There was only a 50% chance that Osama was in the compound. [1] And many other politicians, like Mitt Romney, would of searched more primarily in Afghanistan. The ultimate point is that both Osama and Obama ordered an operation, both good and evil, to take place. Both should get credit or fault in what they did — order an operation. Pro says Osama should, but Obama shouldn't. Even though they did the same kind of thing (morality was different though — they both basically ordered an operation). Contradiction on Pro.

2) Pro-Life

So Pro-life is an example of political framing designed to help that side. Nobody is legitimately pro-abortion. As I said earlier, just because you are partially supportive of something (life) and opposed in helping life elsewhere, it is not really pro-life. You have to support the saving of 45,000 human lives to call yourself pro-life, or else I have to call you pro-fetus, as it is more accurate.

I'll let the voters have the verdict on this point, but this point isn't the one we need that much.

3) Work For a Living

Pro basically distracts us from the real question. Helping your parent occasionally is not "working for a living." Inheritance taxes make the heirs less likely to leech off the work their parents (other people) did.

Pro basically let this point slide. In R2:

"4) Should people have to work to earn their money, not rely on others who work hard?

Yes"

But Pro thinks it is okay if many wealthy kids do not have to work to earn their money and rely on others (their parents) who work hard.

But Pro also thinks that other people must earn their money, not rely on others who work hard. Pro is fine with people (mostly rich people) inheriting money, which is the exact contradicition of the question.

Contradiction here.

4) Taxes

Rule 2# of the official rules says that we "may have an explanation" when a yes/no answer is inadequate. Pro could've taken the liberty to say "I agree with Romney that we should cut taxes -- for the middle class."

But Pro didn't say that. Romney wants to cut taxes, primarily for the wealthy (they gain the most). Pro said we shouldn't cut taxes for them. Possibly a contradiction on this point.


#Rule violation

My bad on that part. We both made minor errors, I don't think we should take the text that literally.

*Side note:

I forgot to add a contradiction on this debate. It was on jobs and Obama, and small gov't, and forgot to add it, I apologize for missing a potentially laughable contradiction.













[1] http://www.cnn.com...
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Magicr 4 years ago
Magicr
The standard for judging this debate is whether Pro contradicted herself at all. The Pro-life question was not asked concerning abortion. It was asked if "you oppose any measure to end it [life]?" Pro answered yes. Thus the contradictions pointed out by Con on this front stand. The work for a living argument was also shown to be a contradiction b/c she never properly refuted it: Caring for your parents is not really working for that living, as Con pointed out. Obama and Osama were also contradictions, as Con showed that they were both only responsible for giving the command. Dictators was not a contradiction b/c Pro did not agree with the action. Taxes was also a contradiction because pro was not specific in her initial response.
Posted by vmpire321 4 years ago
vmpire321
lol 'shredding the constitution"
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Apollo.11 4 years ago
Apollo.11
vmpire321ContraTied
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: The latter 2 pro-life contentions (DP and war) sold it for me. The wording of the question specifically said "measures" to reduce life. This implies a deontological framework. Pro's defense is from a consequentialist perspective. However we are not discussing the the ends, rather the means (measures) to attain them. Con gave non-Yes/no questions but Pro gave non-Yes/no answers, this conduct remains a tie.
Vote Placed by TheHitchslap 4 years ago
TheHitchslap
vmpire321ContraTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:10 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to pro. Con violated the rules, he could only ask yes or no questions. Picking between Mit romney and Obama is NOT a yes or no question.
Vote Placed by TheOrator 4 years ago
TheOrator
vmpire321ContraTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Con had to make several assumptions in order for the possibility for contradiction to arise. I don't think they held up, however.
Vote Placed by ldcon 4 years ago
ldcon
vmpire321ContraTied
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: Easiest vote is on taxes. I.e. If rates for the wealthy are fine, then we shouldn't support Romney's plan, which lowers them. While I think the others could theoretically be contradictions, it's also possible that 'pro-life' doesn't obligate one to all life, etc.
Vote Placed by mongeese 4 years ago
mongeese
vmpire321ContraTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's attempted contradictions were very political and very subjective, making way too many assumptions about intent. Just because something should happen doesn't mean that government should make it happen. Conduct to Pro because Con asked many questions that weren't Yes/No.
Vote Placed by Magicr 4 years ago
Magicr
vmpire321ContraTied
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: Comments