The Instigator
Shimmer
Pro (for)
Winning
1 Points
The Contender
mrrobzilla
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Nothing is fully unique.

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...
Shimmer
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/15/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 464 times Debate No: 38939
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

Shimmer

Pro

1st round is acceptance.
mrrobzilla

Con

everything is unique, in the hands of god.
Debate Round No. 1
Shimmer

Pro

Uniqueness - a concept that humans and other species are closely similar. This means that no one has exactly the same genetics, appearance and personality, but often are very closely similar to others. For example, a parent shares similar genes to their child because they are related, and the child gets their 'uniqueness' from their parents in the same way that 2 people can be similar in terms of hobbies and desires and the ideas and thoughts that we think of. Some part has has been before us.
mrrobzilla

Con

mrrobzilla forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
Shimmer

Pro

Shimmer forfeited this round.
mrrobzilla

Con

mrrobzilla forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 3 years ago
Zaradi
ShimmermrrobzillaTied
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: This was a really bad debate. From the blind appeal to religion to the un-sourced definition of unique, the debate definitely could've been better for both sides. The massive slew of forfeitures makes this really dissapointing as well since I was actually looking forward to this debate since the title was rather interesting. Regardless, I give A point to pro since he was the only one who provided some sort of reasoning at all, even if the reasoning wasn't very good. Con's single sentence isn't counted as an argument because there's no actual warrant to the claim. To be frank, idk why I'm using 600+ characters to explain this vote. It's pretty straightforward.