The Instigator
Con (against)
4 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points


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
Con Tied Pro
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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/6/2011 Category: Society
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,377 times Debate No: 15818
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)




Paedophiles are disgusting & worthless pieces of shite.


Please note that I do agree with your statement about paedophiles....I am not disputing that.

I will debate with you however regarding society and why society is lacking in ways in which to prevent paedophiles attacking.

My points will include the following:

Parents/Guardians and other 'professional adults' who's duty is to protect children.

Social networking and the way in which children present themselves to the public.

In the next round I will elaborate further on these points
Debate Round No. 1


If I wanted this debate I would have posted this debate.


So what debate did you want?

Please note that it is difficult to debate your statement without you participating and explaining further your reasoning for your statement
Debate Round No. 2


As stated in both the comments section & the opening post, the debate I wanted concerns whether paedophilia is right or wrong. I'm not sure why you think you can accept my debate and then change the angle, as well as the entire topic, and then claim to have won. My friend, I could not care less whether I win or not, for this is not the debate I started.


JenniClare forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by larztheloser 5 years ago
@Cliff.Stamp - you don't need to actually believe pedophiles are GOOD, just that they are "not disgusting." There is a huge difference. Even if pro was to argue that pedophiles were good, that wouldn't make her a member of NAMBLA.

Never mind, pro's account is no longer active anyway. I would be willing to do this debate if someone challenges me.
Posted by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
What is this debate really even about?"

Paedophiles, Con thinks they are bad, Pro things they are good, possibly a member of NAMBLA.
Posted by larztheloser 5 years ago
Pro has the burden of proof in any debate. They have not even engaged with the topic so con wins by default.
Posted by dinokiller 5 years ago
Pro winz :P
Posted by larztheloser 5 years ago
@JenniClare - I've already given you two possible lines of attack I might have taken. First, you could have argued that there is no known causal link between pedophilia and being shite. Second, if there were such a causal link, it would be colored by our cultural values. Some cultures, of course, accept pedophilia and it is wrong to say that they are shite therefore. There is no universal morality, blah blah blah. That's how I'd argue against his opinion. You could also have argued from that fact that people have a right to sexual expression, and that the actual fact one is a pedophile is not a choice but a construct (just as with all sexuality).
Posted by Chub123 5 years ago
@JenniClare, contrary to what you think, there are valid arguments against my 'opinion' (as you refer to it). Paedophilia is a psychological disorder, thus claiming that they are worthless & pieces of shite is like trying to claim that all people medically recognised as 'Schizophrenic' are which is obviously an absurd statement to make.
Posted by Chub123 5 years ago
I obviously win.
Posted by JenniClare 5 years ago
Thank you all for commenting, my question to larztheloser is this; How would you argue against an opinionated statement such as the following 'Paedophiles are disgusting & worthless pieces of shite'. How can you argue against a statement like that? It is a persons opinion and their right to think such things if they so wish, Yes I admitted that I agreed with the statement and I will not defend people like that but the debate had no structure or meaning therefore, I adapted the debate to give it a bit more meaning and a sense of direction.
Posted by possible08 5 years ago
Don't make indefensible debates. How are you suppose to argue this?
Posted by larztheloser 5 years ago
All moots are statements of opinion. I feel that the debate should have centered around whether con's assertion is true. I don't think pro has the right to change the topic to his liking. There are valid arguments against con's assertion, such as attacking its universal nature and whether one can still have worth if one has a particular sexual preference. Just because one has a sexual urge does not mean one needs to act on it. As pro has agreed with con's statement about pedophiles, however, I think con is already the clear winner of this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not read the resolution.