The Instigator
SwingState
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
JTSmith
Con (against)
Winning
25 Points

Obama

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  
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: 9/5/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,125 times Debate No: 5277
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

SwingState

Pro

So, if you are going to vote for a candidate based only on the color of his skin, are you a racist? I just heard several people on the radio talking about voting for Obama because he's black. I think it makes you a racist. And I heard Obama say that he lost a state to Hillary because of the color of his skin, but he doesn't ever say he has a problem getting votes based only on the color of his skin.
JTSmith

Con

Though I agree that those voting for Obama based on the color of his skin is in poor taste...
I would not agree that it is racism for two reasons.

1. Racism involves the hatred of a particular race.
Racism - hatred or intolerance of another race or other races
(dictionary.com)
These people are not exhibiting hatred of the white people at all, and thusly, are not exhibiting racism.

...but that is just a technicality...

2. The biggest reason i feel that they are not being racist is because of their intention. They do not feel that a black candidate would be more qulaified. They simply are hoping to advance a traditionally suppressed race.
Never before has a black american come this far in the political arena. They are hoping that an Obama victory, regardless of his stance on the issues, would set a precident that black people are just as capable of white people, as well as break the "glass barrier" (often reffered to in reference to women in politics) of african american limitations.

Simply, they feel like the benefits to the advancement of their race that would come from electing a black president are worth ignoring other issues for.

They do not hate nor do they think a black american would be more qualified, and so, they cannot be considered racist.
Debate Round No. 1
SwingState

Pro

What an eloquent argument indeed. Although, you conveniently missed a few other definitions of the word, ‘racist'. This for instance; "A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race." Or this; "Someone who shows racial prejudice or discrimination." And my final one; "A belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others." But I agree with you, a technical difference, but in this case I think you can prove showing racial prejudice or discrimination.
I believe that performing any act, good or bad, based solely on the color of one's skin clearly falls into the category of racist. If you are voting for Obama just because you are black and Obama is black, that is an act of racism, not hate. And I agree again, in bad taste. I think we can also dispense with the technical argument and discuss society. If a white man said he was going to provide some benefit to another, only because that other person was white, he would by our society standards be labeled a racist.
JTSmith

Con

Playing with the technicality again...
Lets examine your definitions one by one.

1. A belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race.
- I emphasize that those voting for Obama because of his race are simply doing it to advance the cause of their own race, not because they think his race in any way makes him in any way superior. This definition is void.

2. Someone who shows racial prejudice or discrimination
- I addressed this definition in the last round, however, I will restate briefly. Those voting based on Obama's race are not doing so out of prejudice or discrimination. They are voting for him based on the reasons I listed above.

3. Belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human races determine cultural or individual achievement, usually involving the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others.
- Again, it is not about the achievements of Obama's race or any delusions of superiority. Its about paving the way for African Americans all across America to meet similar achievements. Its to finally prove what African Americans are capable of, as well as inspire blacks all over the country!

Now on to society.
You may well consider an act based solely on skin color racist, but by definition, that will not always be the case.
As to the white man who provided benefit to another white man based on race, there are two differences.
a. It is one individual to another. Its not about advancing an entire race. The same rule would apply if it was a black man providing benefit to another black man because of his race. It would still be racism.
b. White people have in the history or our country, been the dominant race. Only within the last few decades has that started to fade away. A lot more cautiousness could be (though i believe shouldnt have to be) exercised by a man whose race traditional discriminated against others, than by a man who was discriminated against. In other words... our history as white people has created a scar of bias taintedness as to our tendency to be racist. Blacks, Hispanics, and Asians will always think the worst of our possibly "racist" intentions because of the way our grandfathers treated their grandfathers. Sadly, its just the way our society has developed, and it can be expected.
Debate Round No. 2
SwingState

Pro

SwingState forfeited this round.
JTSmith

Con

Seeing as my opponent forfeited this round, I cannot form a rebuttal.
What I can say is...
VOTE CON!!!!
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by JBlake 7 years ago
JBlake
SwingStateJTSmithTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Vote Placed by ANSmith 8 years ago
ANSmith
SwingStateJTSmithTied
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 advidiun 8 years ago
advidiun
SwingStateJTSmithTied
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 JTSmith 8 years ago
JTSmith
SwingStateJTSmithTied
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