The Instigator
Matthew3.14
Pro (for)
Winning
26 Points
The Contender
bobbyluig
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Population Control

Do you like this debate?NoYes+3
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 7 votes the winner is...
Matthew3.14
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/27/2012 Category: Society
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 5,342 times Debate No: 23236
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (3)
Votes (7)

 

Matthew3.14

Pro

This is an argument about Population Control. The debate will center upon the issue of whether or not population sizes should be lowered with respective sides, Pro and Con for limiting sizes and against limiting sizes. Perimeters are to be set in California society, customs, and laws. My fellow debator, Bobbyluig is in California, as these are of common sense between us.

I will play devils on this one to gain some perspective into another's thoughts.

First round is acceptance.
bobbyluig

Con

Accepted.
Debate Round No. 1
Matthew3.14

Pro

3 reasons justify my argument:

1. Populations Affect Voting In a Significant Way


Populations are each culture's wants. Although, individuals might vary, a specific culture generally votes for one thing as proven by the fact that over 48% of voters vote by cultural values. If certain cultures are too large, smaller minorities will be ignored. This is intolerance in an unfair voting system.

2. Uncontrolled Growth


Thomas Malthus showed that as populations rose without control, competition rises among people. Eventually, we will face immense competition (as the future of today's society) where there will be those starving and dying because of oversized populations.

3. Government Funds


As populations rise, the government has to divide less funds to each person. Therefore, if sizes are limited, there will be more financial support for each person, thus giving a country with higher intellectual levels.


Sources:
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...
http://tinyurl.com...
bobbyluig

Con

Population control the wrong answer.

1) Democracy is opinions

Every voter in a Democracy should vote based upon their own opinions. A greater population is actually more beneficial due to the different cultures that will be represented. My opponent seems to be prejudice towards specific races by indicating that minorities won't be represented, which is not true because they will also have children. In addition, intolerance is the decision of a person to not tolerate, which is unrelated to voting.

2) You can't change human nature

Population increase are cased by natural progression and response to the economic situation which poor and underdeveloped countries undergo. Try to inject population control and you go against human nature, you bring with it a whole basket of other problems such as war and social unrest. (ex. china: tiny.cc/ogjgdw)

3) Taxes

Government funds come from people, more people equals more funds, resulting in minimal difference.

tiny.cc/rcjgdw
tiny.cc/fdjgdw
tiny.cc/3jjgdw
Debate Round No. 2
Matthew3.14

Pro

I thank Con for having this debate. His argument has flaws exemplified by concept errors.


R1: Con disregards all of my statistics including that over 48% of people vote by heritage where no specific race was a target. Therefore his entire support is invalid because of the inability to grasp concepts.


Link to Pro’s Support 1&2


In R1, certain populations had higher growth than others due to economic statuses, conceded by Con’s support 2. This shows the highly unequal distribution of votes.


R2: Support 2 rests on allegations of “controlling nature.” Wrong. People decide to obey laws or not. In his example, unrest is from those who decide to disregard the law similar to convicts in California which shows the negative side of not controlling growth.


R3: Con forgets that funds come from those with money to pay taxes. Based on Malthus’s model, increased struggles make people LESS able topay for funds.


Sources:


http://tinyurl.com...


http://tinyurl.com...


http://tinyurl.com...


bobbyluig

Con

R1: Pro, has disregarded my statement on that Democracy is based upon opinions; which means that people will vote based upon heritage and their own beliefs. The whole purpose of voting its self is so that individuals who satisfy the needs of others will be represented. According to Pro's arguments, more than 50% do not vote based upon heritage, which means that they will vote for those which will benefit them. Pro seems to misunderstand the concept of voting and Democracy in general.
R2: Of course population control is controlling nature. Preventing people from reproducing in fear of conflicting with law is not only immoral but problematic. A person should have rights, especially in their own body. By allowing government control over human life, it is basically giving the government complete power over what one can do daily.
R3: Success comes in numbers. More children will likely result in more people working as adults, therefore, pay more taxes.

tiny.cc/9ddhdw
tiny.cc/4fdhdw
tiny.cc/epdhdw
Debate Round No. 3
Matthew3.14

Pro

As a summary, I would like to conclude the following facts:


1) Rerebuttal 1: 48% vote based on heritage is huge! It's almost an entire half of a population, similar to having 50 million people vote for something out of 100 million which is nevertheless a disproportionate voting system and further supports my 1st and 2nd argument.

2) Rerebuttal 2: "Immorality" is subjective. In addition, Con's new argument that people should have full rights to their body implys prostitution, drugs, and other illegal acts and shows what leads from his argument.

3) Rebuttal 3: The children stated by Con will never reach proper education levels as working adults if they can't survive admist high competition. Therefore, not enough money will come in with a country full of poor people struggling for survival. This supports my Argument 3

I have defended my stance, rebutted all of Con's arguments and fulfilled the BOP. Con has brought up new arguments near the end of the debate which is poor conduct.

Vote Pro!
bobbyluig

Con

Yes, vote Pro!
Debate Round No. 4
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Matthew3.14 4 years ago
Matthew3.14
Oh I can't belive bobbyluig did that...darn...now I can't improve... well at least I tried to win.
Posted by Jacket123 4 years ago
Jacket123
@CRBarrow: I don't get what's wrong with that. You against California or something? There's nothing wrong with making the be on common ground.
Posted by CRBarrow 4 years ago
CRBarrow
This guy is all over the home page -.-* with nothing but California laws, culture, etc. that gets annoying kid
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by renji_abarai 4 years ago
renji_abarai
Matthew3.14bobbyluigTied
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: Conceded
Vote Placed by ConservativePolitico 4 years ago
ConservativePolitico
Matthew3.14bobbyluigTied
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: Conceded Debate
Vote Placed by 16kadams 4 years ago
16kadams
Matthew3.14bobbyluigTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Jacket123 4 years ago
Jacket123
Matthew3.14bobbyluigTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate was just plain dumb at the end. Con just gave up.
Vote Placed by 1dustpelt 4 years ago
1dustpelt
Matthew3.14bobbyluigTied
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:70 
Reasons for voting decision: LOLOLOLYOULOSTTHEGAMELOLOL
Vote Placed by Multi_Pyrocytophage 4 years ago
Multi_Pyrocytophage
Matthew3.14bobbyluigTied
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: Concession.
Vote Placed by Wallstreetatheist 4 years ago
Wallstreetatheist
Matthew3.14bobbyluigTied
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: One of the worst debates on DDO, but Con conceded to pro.