The Instigator
Witty11
Con (against)
Losing
79 Points
The Contender
Freeman
Pro (for)
Winning
217 Points

Pre-Marital Sex

Do you like this debate?NoYes+17
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 54 votes the winner is...
Freeman
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/5/2010 Category: Society
Updated: 7 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 27,345 times Debate No: 11109
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (80)
Votes (54)

 

Witty11

Con

First, I would like to say I am a virgin and am very strongly opinionated on this subject. Virginity is a virtue of which to be proud, and I will remain a virgin until I am married.

DO NOT TAKE THIS DEBATE IF YOU DO NOT HAVE TIME. I WOULD LIKE GOOD DEBATE, THANK YOU!

Definition of marriage:
A marriage is the relationship between a husband and wife.

Definition of premarital:
Premarital means happening at some time before someone gets married.

Definition of wife:
A married woman; a man's partner in marriage.

Definition of husband:
A married man; a woman's partner in marriage.

Definition of virginity:
Virginity is the state of never having had sex.

Definition of sex:
Sexual union between a male and female involving either insertion of the penis into the vagina or genital contact other than vaginal penetration by the penis.

Definition of sexual activity:
This covers sex as well as other actions intended to result in sexual arousal or gratification. Sex includes penile-vaginal, anal and oral sex. Other actions intended to result in sexual arousal or gratifications, include, but are not limited to: masturbation, mutual masturbation, fondling, the use of sex toys, and the viewing of pornography. Also called sexual contact.

Definition of abstinence:
Refraining from engaging in sex while unmarried. In other words, to practice abstinence is to reserve sex solely for marriage by deciding not to have sex until one is married.

Definition of chastity:
Is the state of not having sex with anyone, or of only having sex with your husband or wife.

Definition of purity:
Freedom from guilt or the defilement of sin; innocence; chastity; as, purity of heart or of life.

Definition of virtue:
Virtue is thinking and doing what is right and avoiding what is wrong. A virtue is a good quality or way of behaving.

Definition of health:
Health is a state in which a person is not suffering from any illness and is feeling well. A person's health is the condition of their body and the extent to which it is free from illness or is able to resist illness.

Contention 1) Having sex with only your spouse is healthier than having sex with multiple partners. a) There are extremely lower chances of getting a STD if a person waits to have sex until they are married than if they don't. b) If a husband and wife both wait to have sex until they are married STD are impossible to get.

Contention 2) Premarital sex can lead to emotional problems that can be avoided if a husband and a wife wait to have sex until they are married. a) Partners are more likely to anger at previous sexual decisions the other has made in the past. b) Spouses are less likely to cheat on each other than unmarried partners are. c) Marriage is a stronger bond than simply dating. d) When a man and women wait to have sex until they are married there is less baggage that is brought to the relationship. e) A husband or wife will not worry about there spouse cheating on them because they know that they have enough self control to wait until they were married, the self control necessary to keep from cheating on there spouse has already been acquired.

Contention 3) Unwanted pregnancy is easier to avoid. a) Health problems that may occur from pregnancy are not a problem. b) Abortions that can be dangerous to pregnant women are not an issue. c) If a pregnant woman's boyfriend leaves her the baby is not a sole burden for the women.

Contention 4) Single parent families tend to have more problems whereas two parent families don't. a) Single mothers are poorer, have more health problems, may have more problems interacting with their children, and are more likely to suffer from stress, depression, and other emotional and psychological problems.
b) Non-resident biological fathers are at risk of losing contact with their children and are more likely to have health problems and engage in high-risk behavior.

Contention 5) People who have grown up in single parent homes are more likely to have problems. a) Children living without there biological fathers are more likely to live in poverty and deprivation, are more likely to run away from home, have more trouble in school, tend to have more trouble getting along with others, have higher risk of health problems, and are at greater risk of suffering physical, emotional, or sexual abuse. b) Teenagers living without their biological fathers are more likely to experience problems with sexual health, are more likely to become teenage parents, and more likely to offend, smoke, drink alcohol, take drugs, leave school at 16, and have adjustment problems. c) Young adults who did not grow up with there biological father are less likely to attain qualifications, more likely to experience unemployment, more likely to have low incomes, more likely be on income support, more likely to experience homelessness, more likely to be caught offending and go to jail, more likely to suffer from long term emotional and psychological problems, more likely to develop health problems, more likely to have children outside marriage or outside any partnership, and are more likely to divorce or dissolve their cohabiting unions. d) Single mothers are twice as likely as two-parent families to live in poverty at any one time (69% of lone mothers are in the bottom 40% of household income versus 34% of couples with children), and are more likely to have health, social and interaction problems. e) these patterns are likely to repeat.

Good Luck to my opponent

http://www.choicesaz.org...
http://www.google.com...
http://www.google.com...|en&hl=en&q=health
http://www.google.com...|en&hl=en&q=marriage
http://www.google.com...|en&q=Premarital&hl=en
http://www.google.com...|en&q=Virginity&hl=en
http://www.google.com...|en&q=Wife&hl=en
http://www.google.com...|en&q=Husband&hl=en
http://www.google.com...
http://www.civitas.org.uk...
Freeman

Pro

My opponent's arguments may look convincing at surface value. Nevertheless, they are ultimately built upon nothing but logical fallacies and irrational presuppositions. Moreover, under my opponent's current suggestions, two people should avoid having sex even the night before their marriage. This is ludicrous, and I hope to demonstrate this much in my essay.

=====> A Critique of Witty11's Opening Arguments <=====

Contention 1: STDs

A. "Having sex with only your spouse is healthier than having sex with multiple partners."

Along with being unfounded, this assertion relies on an illegitimate assumption. Two people may choose to never get married and yet remain completely monogamous for the rest of their lives. [1]

B. "There are extremely lower chances of getting a STD if a person waits to have sex until they are married than if they don't."

There are also extremely low chances of getting into a car accident if you never drive a car. Look, some human activities involve certain amounts of risk. However, the risks associated with sex can be mitigated through contraception and other methods. Only the deeply irrational would choose to almost never have sex or drive cars because there are risks associated with those activities.

Contention 2: Sex and Emotional Health

A. "Premarital sex can lead to emotional problems that can be avoided if a husband and a wife wait to have sex until they are married."

My opponent hasn't provided any compelling reasons to suppose that any of this is true. On top of this, two people can choose to be in a deeply committed and loving relationship without ever wanting to get married.

Contention 3: Sex and Pregnancies

"Unwanted pregnancy is easier to avoid [under marriage]."

I'm not sure what my opponent is trying to say. Wedding rings don't magically add to the efficacy of contraception.

Contention 4: Single Parent Households

A. "Single parent families tend to have more problems whereas two parent families don't."

This contention is based upon a plethora of irrational assumptions. People can use contraception to avoid getting pregnant. Moreover, women can still choose to get an abortion if they do accidentally get pregnant. On top of this, unmarried couples are not guaranteed to separate when they end up creating a child.

Contention 5: Single Parent Households [part 2]

My opponent's fifth contention makes the same mistakes as his fourth contention. As such, it suffers from all of the same problems.

=====> In Defense of Premarital Sex <======

Contention 1: Sex, in and of itself, is a non-moral activity.

Sex does not carry with it anything that distinguishes it from other human activities in ethical terms. It can be used maliciously (e.g. rape), and it can be used in love. The negative consequences of sex, many of which my opponent has mentioned, can all be mitigated through a variety of different means, including contraception. Avoiding sex doesn't have anything to do with the alleviation of suffering or the maximization of happiness of conscious creatures. Consequently, it is simply irrational to think that abstinence is noble in any way.

::Conclusion::

The absurd implications of my opponent's proposal simply make this resolution untenable. Two people may choose to be in a loving committed relationship and may not want to get married. Or they may be unable to get married if they're members of the same sex. [2] Being abstinent all the way until the arbitrary deadline of marriage is not normal in humans; it's not praiseworthy, and it's not morally virtuous.

::References::

1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
2. http://en.wikipedia.org...(2008)
Debate Round No. 1
Witty11

Con

Sir thank you for accepting this debate.

My opponent has a "plethora" of fallacies, and I will show these fallacies in my following defense and rebuttal

My opponent starts his critique by stating, "Two people may choose to never get married and yet remain completely monogamous for the rest of their lives." My opponent misses the point completely, as he uses this comment while attacking this statement "Having sex with only your spouse is healthier than having sex with multiple partners." My opponent says they could stay "completely monogamous," but my contention states having "multiple partners" this attack on my contention is invalid and can't be applied because you can not be monogamous and have multiple partners at the same time.

Next my opponent attacks the statement, "There are extremely lower chances of getting a STD if a person waits to have sex until they are married than if they don't." He states, "There are also extremely low chances of getting into a car accident if you never drive a car. Look, some human activities involve certain amounts of risk. However, the risks associated with sex can be mitigated through contraception and other methods. Only the deeply irrational would choose to almost never have sex or drive cars because there are risks associated with those activities."
"Look", sex does not have to be a risky activity. By waiting to have sex until after you are married, you minimize risks, and you can completely avoid risks if your spouse is also a virgin. Additionally, contraception (i.e., condoms) fail 31% of the time; this is an extremely "risky" high percentage, given the fact that AIDS CAN KILL YOU!!! Also, just like condoms, seat belts are there to help, but these will not always keep you safe. Also recent studies have proven the best prevention of diseases and unwanted pregnancies is abstinence! Not only is this proven, it is also common sense. Only the "deeply irrational" can not recognize this fact.

My opponent does not attack my statement saying "If a husband and wife both wait to have sex until they are married STD are impossible to get." I take this as my opponent conceding to this statement.

http://www.prolife.com...
http://womenshealth.about.com...
http://www.guttmacher.org...

"On top of this, two people can choose to be in a deeply committed and loving relationship without ever wanting to get married." If they are that deeply in love why would they not want to get married, I am sure that some people do this but it is very unlikely that if two people are that deeply in love that they would not want to get married. My opponent does not attack the rest of contention so once again I assume that he concedes to these statements.

"This contention is based upon a plethora of irrational assumptions. People can use contraception to avoid getting pregnant. Moreover, women can still choose to get an abortion if they do accidentally get pregnant. On top of this, unmarried couples are not guaranteed to separate when they end up creating a child." as mentioned before contraception's fail to work and abortions can kill women. Also the rate of separations in unmarried couples is extremely higher than in married couples.

My fifth contention does not have any mistakes in reasoning, just as my forth did not.

My rebuttal.

"The negative consequences of sex, many of which my opponent has mentioned, can all be mitigated through a variety of different means, including contraception." they can not all be mitigated, except through abstinence once again contraception's fail.

"Avoiding sex doesn't have anything to do with the alleviation of suffering or the maximization of happiness of conscious creatures." Of course it does; all "conscious creatures" have morals, some more than others. Peace of mind, development of self control, and good health can maximize happiness by avoiding sex until marriage.
One can alleviate suffering by not catching a STD that they got from having premarital sex.

Morals are what a person believes to be right or wrong.

"Consequently, it is simply irrational to think that abstinence is noble in any way." if something is noble, it is putting something above your own sexual, selfish desires or putting someone else first above yourself so waiting ( even though you may not want to ) is noble in itself.

Explain to me how sex is not a moral activity because if this were true, there would be no laws against prohibiting any sexual act (i.e. rape, sodomy, prostitution, pedophilia, etc.) Even the law recognizes the moral issues surrounding sex

Morals are what a person believes to be right or wrong.

Define Virtuous:
pure: in a state of sexual virginity; "pure and vestal modesty";

The absurd implications of my opponent's proposal simply make this resolution untenable. Two people may choose to be in a loving committed relationship and may not want to get married. Or they may be unable to get married if they're members of the same sex. [2] Being abstinent all the way until the arbitrary deadline of marriage is not normal in humans; it's not praiseworthy, and it's not morally virtuous. My opponent can not argue these points because they are simply opinions; he can not define what is normal.
Not having premarital Sex is obviously virtuous
Freeman

Pro

Let me begin by thanking Mr. Witty for bringing up this topic that he obviously feels passionate about.

One of the things DDO has taught me is that it's not necessary to chase down all of the red herrings you come across in other people's arguments. So, I don't feel the need to keep refuting bad arguments over and over again in this debate. In fact, I feel so confident that my position is virtually unassailable at this point that I am going to be very brief in this round.

=====> A Critique of Witty11's Arguments <=====

Contention 1: STDs

A. "Having sex with only your spouse is healthier than having sex with multiple partners."

Once again, my opponent's contention is based on a false dichotomy. [1] People that have sex outside of the bounds of marriage are not guaranteed to have sex with multiple partners.

B. "By waiting to have sex until after you are married, you minimize risks, and you can completely avoid risks if your spouse is also a virgin. Additionally, contraception (i.e., condoms) fail 31% of the time; this is an extremely "risky" high percentage, given the fact that AIDS CAN KILL YOU!"

My opponent's contention is an appeal to fear [2], and it is based on faulty statistics. Condoms don't fail 31 percent of the time; this assertion is ridiculous. Condoms are both effective at preventing the spread of aids [3], and they are effective at preventing pregnancies. Depending on whether or not condoms are used correctly, they can help prevent pregnancies 97 percent of the time. [4]

Contention 2: Sex and Emotional Health

" If [two people] are that deeply in love why would they not want to get married" -Witty11

None of your business; how's that for an answer. If two people are in love and they don't want to get married for whatever reason, then that is their choice. Arguing that they should avoid having sex because of this is simply outrageous.

Contention 3: Sex and Pregnancies

This argument is dead and meaningless.

Contention 4: Single Parent Households

This argument is dead and meaningless.

Contention 5: Single Parent Households [part 2]

Like contentions 3 and 4, this argument is also dead and meaningless. My opponent's arguments only become more exposed for their weakness as this debate has continued forward.

=====> In Defense of Premarital Sex <======

Contention 1: Sex, in and of itself, is a non-moral activity.

"Explain to me how sex is not a moral activity because if this were true, there would be no laws against prohibiting any sexual act (i.e. rape, sodomy, prostitution, pedophilia, etc.)"

Like I said before, sex is a morally neutral activity. Whether or not sex is immoral depends on the context it takes place it in. There is nothing prima facie wrong with engaging in consensual sexual activity.

Simply put, sex is a way people express their love for one another. Adults can engage in it in a responsible manner that doesn't harm anyone. Therefore, the notion that people should limit their sexual activity by the arbitrary status of marriage is simply an indefensible position.

Moreover, even if I granted the primary claims of my opponent's arguments, his resolution would still fail. Under the current resolution, committed couples that aren't married shouldn't have sex. And couples should also avoid having sex the night before their wedding. Like I've pointed out earlier, this is a ridiculous consequence of my antagonist's views.

::Conclusion::

I really don't know what more I can say. I've completely crippled all of my opponent's arguments. Consequently, Witty11 has decided to engage in quite a bit of fear mongering about sex, abortions, and contraception. None of these tactics should be persuasive to anyone.

::References::

1. http://www.iep.utm.edu...
2. http://www.iep.utm.edu...
3. http://www.avert.org...
4. http://www.youngwomenshealth.org...
Debate Round No. 2
Witty11

Con

My opponent throughout this debate has more than once told me how "outrageous" my statements have been so in honor of this I would like to state that the only thing that is "outrageous" in this whole debate is my opponents lack of debating skills.

My opponent does not offer anything but opinions throughout this debate, but he attacks what he considers my opinions. The only difference between me and my opponents statement is that I have facts to back mine up where my opponent does not. My opponent has not been able to argue my points so to make up for this he uses all kinds of 25 Cent words but yet he still fails to use the correctly in some cases. Also my opponent does not have any way to argue my points so he decides to get off subject. I hate to even start to argue these next points my opponent offers because I know it will fall on on def ears and irrational, illogical, and delusional thinking. Basically where my opponents reasoning is coming from is, he is simply trying to justify the mistakes he has made. But here I go.

"One of the things DDO has taught me is that it's not necessary to chase down all of the red herrings you come across in other people's arguments." The only reason my opponent mentions this is because he has nothing to state against my argument which is supported with facts, common sense, and the truth.

"In fact, I feel so confident that my position is virtually unassailable at this point that I am going to be very brief in this round." this is just another example of my opponents delusional thinking and also obviously shows that the reason my opponent is keeping it brief is because he has nothing to state that will help his argument.

"People that have sex outside of the bounds of marriage are not guaranteed to have sex with multiple partners." this is the one part of my opponents argument that is PARTIALLY true. They are not guaranteed to but it is more likely.

"My opponent's contention is an appeal to fear [2], and it is based on faulty statistics. Condoms don't fail 31 percent of the time; this assertion is ridiculous. Condoms are both effective at preventing the spread of aids [3], and they are effective at preventing pregnancies. Depending on whether or not condoms are used correctly, they can help prevent pregnancies 97 percent of the time. [4]"
Firstly, the statistics I used are not faulty they are 100% true condoms fail 31% of the time when trying to stop the spread of aids this is because the AIDS Virus is smaller than the holes in the condoms. If my opponent had looked at my sites he would have saw this. Secondly, If you wait to have sex you do not have to worry about getting aids so obviously abstinence is the best way to go. n my opponents site it does say that condoms work 97% of the time at preventing pregnancy. But this is only counting if it used correctly which is not always the case. My opponent is trying to bend the facts. Once again abstinence is the best way to prevent unwanted pregnancies.

"None of your business; how's that for an answer. If two people are in love and they don't want to get married for whatever reason, then that is their choice. Arguing that they should avoid having sex because of this is simply outrageous."
Obviously I have struck a nerve here so I will not comment on this statement.

"Contention 3: Sex and Pregnancies

This argument is dead and meaningless.

Contention 4: Single Parent Households

This argument is dead and meaningless.

Contention 5: Single Parent Households [part 2]

Like contentions 3 and 4, this argument is also dead and meaningless. My opponent's arguments only become more exposed for their weakness as this debate has continued forward."

This is a very poor attempt on my opponents part THE ONLY REASON THESE POINTS ARE "DEAD AND MEANINGLESS" IS BECAUSE MY OPPONENT CAN NOTCOME UP WITH ANYTHING TO SAY TO THEM MY STATEMENTS ARE SO STRONG THAT MY OPPONENT HAS NO WAY TO ATTAK THEM!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I have clearly out debated my opponent and this is the perfect example.

""Explain to me how sex is not a moral activity because if this were true, there would be no laws against prohibiting any sexual act (i.e. rape, sodomy, prostitution, pedophilia, etc.)"

Like I said before, sex is a morally neutral activity. Whether or not sex is immoral depends on the context it takes place it in. There is nothing prima facie wrong with engaging in consensual sexual activity."

his is not what my opponent had stated before I burned him on this statement so he is running back on his words this is hat my opponent had stated previously.
"Contention 1: Sex, in and of itself, is a non-moral activity."
My opponent said that it was a "non-moral activity" not that it was "morally neutral" or that it was "immoral" (which it is) this is another example at my opponents debate falling apart.

"Moreover, even if I granted the primary claims of my opponent's arguments" which you should because they are correct and obviously my opponent can tell that they are, or he would have not made this statement.

"his resolution would still fail. Under the current resolution, committed couples that aren't married shouldn't have sex. And couples should also avoid having sex the night before their wedding. Like I've pointed out earlier, this is a ridiculous consequence of my antagonist's views."

My resolution is essay to prove and that is what I have done. WAITING TO HAVE SEX TILL AFTER YOU ARE MARRIED IS HEALTHIER FOR THE PHYSICAL AND MENTAL PARTS OF THE BODY.

If you had sex the night before your wedding in theory you could have sex with someone that is not your spouse.

"I really don't know what more I can say. I've completely crippled all of my opponent's arguments. Consequently, Witty11 has decided to engage in quite a bit of fear mongering about sex, abortions, and contraception. None of these tactics should be persuasive to anyone."

I really don't know what I can say. Well I guess I could start off by saying that my opponent tactics re quite sad, also I could say the I have proved that I have superior debating skills and, that my opponents argument "may look convincing at surface value. Nevertheless, they are ultimately built upon nothing but logical fallacies and irrational" statements he has clearly been defeated.

I WOULD HOP THAT YOU WOULD VOTE FOR ME EVEN IF YOU PREVIOUS LIFE CHOICES DO NOT MATCH WAT I HAVE STATED THAT YOU WILL STILL VOTE CON, I FEEL THAT I HAVE OUT DEBATED MY OPPONENT. SO EVEN THOUGH MY OPPONENTS ARGUMENT LOOKS STRONG WITH ALL OF IT'S 25 CENT WORDS AND TWISTING OF INFORMATION I HOPE THAT YOU CAN SEE MY POINT AND ALSO SEE THAT I HAVE PROVEN MY STATEMENTS CORRECT TO THE BEST OF MY ABILITY.
THANK YOU

Even though I do not agree with my opponent by any means I thank him for excepting this debate.
Freeman

Pro

I would like to thank Mr. Witty for putting forth this motion. While I do not share his views on this matter, I do appreciate his willingness to put his own opinions up for criticism. I will wrap up this debate by, once again, pointing out the flaws in my opponent's position. Additionally, I will give one last recap of my own argument.

=====> A Critique of Witty11's Arguments <=====

Contention 1: STDs

A. "Having sex with only your spouse is healthier than having sex with multiple partners."

As stated at numerous other instances, this assertion relies on unfounded assumptions and a false dichotomy. Being unmarried does not guarantee that one will practice unsafe sex with multiple people. Moreover, being married does not prevent one from having sex with other partners. Just ask the Reverend Ted Haggard.

Contention 2: Sex and Emotional Health

The only thing that is likely to lead to mental and emotional trauma, as far as sex is concerned, is the cognitive dissonance religious people create for themselves by repressing their sexuality.

Contention's 3-5: Sex, Pregnancies, and Single Family Households.

All of my opponent's last three arguments are based on false assumptions that stem from his personal conceptions about the world and sexuality. Pre marital sex does not guarantee the proliferation of single parent households, and I'm baffled as to why anyone would think this. Consequently, the arguments he has presented in this section can rightfully be disregarded. They are all wholly irrelevant.

=====> In Defense of Premarital Sex <======

Contention 1: Sex, in and of itself, is a non-moral activity.

Unfortunately, my opponent doesn't seem to realize that the terms "morally neutral" and "non-moral" can more or less be used interchangeably. However, this point is of little relevance in the larger scheme of things. More importantly, repressing sexual impulses in the absence of reason does not equate to virtuous behavior. No discernable goodness can be produced by arbitrarily limiting sexual relationships to marriage. Therefore, it is simply pointless to say that sex is morally wrong if it is not tied to marriage.

::Conclusion::

Throughout this debate my opponent has presented no reasonable arguments that would properly uphold the resolution. As I have pointed out earlier, even if I were to grant my opponent's primary concerns, then his proposal would still be without merit. Couples that aren't legally married, or are planning to get married, would not encounter any of the fantastic problems my opponent has dreamed up. Consequently, there is no reason to think that the arbitrary boundary of marriage is a sufficient basis from which one can justifiably repress sexual impulses. Indeed, the power of the human mind is an insufficient tool to adequately prop up such an antiquated view of the world.
Debate Round No. 3
80 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by reddj2 6 years ago
reddj2
Wtf not a single person commented on their vote???
Posted by shooey 6 years ago
shooey
This didn't help much.. I still don't know where I stand.
But I feel strange that pro didn't point out, during the argument, marriage comes with a wedding ring--not a chastity belt you only get to take off under your spouses supervision... While it's certainly immoral to be unfaithful whether under oath or not, it happens.
And marriage isn't, as con stated, a foolproof safety-net from StD's. An otherwise moral and wholesome spouse can make a couple bad decisions (get wasted? have a 1ns? etc?) and violate his/her oath, making his/her spouse susceptible to the disease as well.

Also.. a committed couple who for whatever reasons are unable to/don't want to get married can both have StD tests, thus making StD's(in a faithful relationship between said couple) just as impossible as would be in a marriage.

When it comes down to it, I think, the risk of StD really depends upon both partners' moral views, and how faithfully they reiniforce those views in their life.
Posted by SuperRobotWars 6 years ago
SuperRobotWars
Posted by unlikely 6 years ago
unlikely
virginity is just not a virtue....
if you dont want to have sex...dont do it...
but please dont sell it as a virtue...its just a bit grubby to do so
Posted by Atheism 6 years ago
Atheism
A poor debate from Con's side, he used slander and myths to persuade the voters. Needless to say, the more intellectual of the crowd went with Freeman. Freeman, nice arguments by the way. Win. =]
Posted by InsertNameHere 7 years ago
InsertNameHere
Lol, how is it narcissistic? I suppose I must be a narcissist then. :) If so, I'm proud to be one.
Posted by yayawhatever 7 years ago
yayawhatever
It's pretty narcissistic of u to say that you're a virgin and virginity is something to be proud of.
Posted by Anacharsis 7 years ago
Anacharsis
You guys are 14 & 19? Go out and live a while and see how you feel about this one. Con may find his virginal wife lied a lot, has been banging everyone in town and wish he'd gotten his own share a lot more when he was young. Pro may find that chastity and commitment have positive effects on how one views oneself and have a chance to witness the pain, disgrace and heartache that can follow some simple mistakes. Both of these situations do occur. I tend to come down on the side that says not having pre-marital sex would be better, but that's just my personal bias. Seems like given the age demographic on this site, the voting seems to follow the desire of youth to act out their horny impulses. I do commonly vote for debaters contending against my own belief when they run the better debate, but in this case it seems like Pro tries defeating the obviously faulty arguments of Con with logic that fails to take into account a lot of what really goes on in the world; leaving Con's arguments at least closer to reality in principle.
Posted by Kinesis 7 years ago
Kinesis
Because a large contingent of this site are teenagers who jump at the word 'sex'.
Posted by Freeman 7 years ago
Freeman
What makes ths debate so popular?

I have no idea.
54 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by EllieP 6 years ago
EllieP
Witty11FreemanTied
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 shooey 6 years ago
shooey
Witty11FreemanTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:61 
Vote Placed by cmahdavi 6 years ago
cmahdavi
Witty11FreemanTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by katelyn 6 years ago
katelyn
Witty11FreemanTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Vote Placed by Elmakai 6 years ago
Elmakai
Witty11FreemanTied
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:03 
Vote Placed by Zealotical 6 years ago
Zealotical
Witty11FreemanTied
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 gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
Witty11FreemanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by shanmthomas 6 years ago
shanmthomas
Witty11FreemanTied
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 
Vote Placed by Shtookah 6 years ago
Shtookah
Witty11FreemanTied
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 
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 6 years ago
SuperRobotWars
Witty11FreemanTied
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