The Instigator
imabench
Pro (for)
Losing
2 Points
The Contender
xXCryptoXx
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

Resolved: Everyone under 16 should be put to death for the sake of humanity

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 3 votes the winner is...
xXCryptoXx
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/21/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,428 times Debate No: 35838
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (24)
Votes (3)

 

imabench

Pro

First round acceptance only
xXCryptoXx

Con

This should be interesting.

I ACCEPT THY CHALLENGE SO THAT I MAY SLAY THY BENCH!
Debate Round No. 1
imabench

Pro

Reasons why everyone under 16 should be put to death immediately:

1) They b*tch about EVERYTHING

You know how these days when something's got you down and you just move past it? 16 year olds b*tch about EVERYTHING! 'oh no, my gf that ive been in a relationship for 4 days hasnt replied to my text, our relationship is over waaaa'. Heres an idea, MAN THE F-CK UP! 16 year olds b*tch about everything, just ask anyone who is a parent of a teen. If everyone under 16 was put to death, we wouldnt have to deal with any more of their whiny bullsh*t

2) They make everything terrible

The main reason why music is so bad these days is because 13 year old girls are the only people who buy music anymore... I mean Bieber? Nicki Minaj? BOTDF? There are actually people who think that One Direction is infinitely times better then the Beatles! If we want to save music from becoming sh*tty, we need to kill everyone under 16 years old!

Its not just music either. When was the last time you saw a good cartoon show and you enjoyed it? Chances are, NOT IN A LONG TIME! Because all these young kids have made cartoons absolute sh*t... I mean I cant even WATCH new episodes of Spongebob anymore since its gotten so bad yet I still remember the one where the pioneers drove rocks for miles! Cartoons, fashion, cars, music, video games.... ALL of it has gotten worse because everyone 16 years old and younger has terrible taste in everything!

We must choose between killing all music, video games, tv, etc...... or killing everyone under the age of 16..... Take your pick

3) Not have to guess age of the chicks you bang anymore

You know those 15 year olds who have the body of a 19 year old and you have to really think if shes lying about her age so that if you make sex to her you dont go to jail for rape? Well if we kill off everyone who is under 16 then we wont have that problem anymore, and people can be free to date anyone they want without fearing if they are dating a minor who just happens to have some slammin titties.

4) Actual arguments

just so that this doesnt get removed or reported Ill include some 'actual' arguments so that this doesnt qualify as a hateful debate. A lot of people get butthurt easily by stuff so just let me do this for the sake of precaution...

If we kill off everyone under 16 it doesnt mean we always kill them, this is a one time thing and people can start making babies again after its all over. Killing off all the minors will give huge breathing room to social security in the future, it will give education breathing room as well since everyone will either be a junior in high school or higher, a lot less people will be killed from car accidents which are often caused by teenagers. Alright that should be enough (feel free to bullsh*t your way past these actual arguments)
xXCryptoXx

Con


The reason children are so terrible today is because of advancements in technology, meaning they never have to work a day of their lives and that when they do have to work, they b!tch and moan about it.


They also do these “terrible” things to the entertainment biz because that stuff is simple, catches their attention, doesn’t make them think, and they have a lot of free time.


Even if we killed off all the children, the new batch of children that will be born will be just as bad or worse than the generation before, due to technology making their lives easier and easier.


So for the sake of it, think of all the cute babies you’ll be killing off for nothing since the new batch of children won’t be any better.





Generations evolve and it’s natural so just let it play out.


Complaining


Like explained earlier, killing off the children won’t solve this problem because the fresh batch of children will be just as bad.


In addition, let’s remember that adults b*tch nearly just as much as children do, just look at GWL-CPA.



…He just doesn’t understand why kids love the taste Cinnamon Toast Crunch.


Anyways, politicians are the main source of all of the b*tching that goes around, so target them.




Making Things Terrible


It’s children that make people like Nicki Minaj popular, and they will continue to make annoying pop stars popular so that really doesn’t solve that problem.


Let’s also remember that every older generation thinks that the younger generation’s music is crap, it’s been that way since mah great great granpappy were alive.



My opponent talks about how children ruin cartoons.


Cartoons are made for kids, kids don’t choose whether they are crappy or not. Let’s also remember that the old Spongebob was part of the generation you want so badly to kill off.


Fashion, really? Who gives a flying f*ck about what people wear. Sure the girls are a bit showy but what guy doesn’t like that?


Ima argues cars. Seriously?! Every kid you know will say they love trucks and muscle cars (Mustang, Challenger) and you really think that’s bad taste?



Age of Chicks Ya Bang


You’re killing off all kids 15 and under. You still have to deal with the 16 year olds and the 17 year olds and let’s be honest, if you “mistake” a 15 year old or younger kid for an 18 year old then you were probably pretty desperate yourself.


It’s the 16 and 17 year olds that are the problem and you aren’t fixing it by killing all the people younger than them.



Actual Arguments


“Killing off all the minors will give huge breathing room to social security in the future”


I don’t know much about social security so I’ll drop this. Let’s just remember, is it worth killing that innocent, adorable baby for some political gain?


“it will give education breathing room as well since everyone will either be a junior in high school or higher”


Then we’ll watch every private school crash.


“a lot less people will be killed from car accidents which are often caused by teenagers.”


You’re killing everyone under 16, so this argument doesn’t work.


Debate Round No. 2
imabench

Pro

Sorry it took so long ive been busy doing nothing.

Lets get right into it

"Even if we killed off all the children, the new batch of children that will be born will be just as bad or worse than the generation before, due to technology making their lives easier and easier."

Yes but for like 10 years we would all just be living on cloud 9 and the world wouldnt suck in so many ways which is what we're aiming for. This wouldnt END all the sh*tty stuff caused by kids.... It would just give us a break from all of it.




"So for the sake of it, think of all the cute babies you’ll be killing off for nothing"

Ok lets be real, babies arent cute. Babies look like potatoes that were left in the microwave a little too long...



"Like explained earlier, killing off the children won’t solve this problem because the fresh batch of children will be just as bad."

But we'll get a ten year break from it all which is the point of the argument!



"let’s remember that adults b*tch nearly just as much as children do, just look at GWL-CPA."

GWL is just bitter because his crackhead daughter is a drug addict..... Though I cant blame her for taking drugs, I mean GWL IS her father and all so I understand her motives.....




"Anyways, politicians are the main source of all of the b*tching that goes around, so target them."

I would but if I made a debate titled 'Obama should be put to death for the sake of humanity' then the NSA will be at my door and Ill end up in Guantanamo....

I do find it funny though that the NSA spies on everyone in the US..... That just means that someone in the NSA has had to look at pictures of my d*ck ;D





"they will continue to make annoying pop stars popular so that really doesn’t solve that problem."

BUT WE'LL HAVE A BREAK FROM THEIR SH*T WHICH IS THE POINT HERE




"every older generation thinks that the younger generation’s music is crap, it’s been that way since mah great great granpappy were alive"

I dont think they even had music back in the 1700's.... Unless you count a man yelling at his wife as 'music'





"Let’s also remember that the old Spongebob was part of the generation you want so badly to kill off."

Spongebob WAS good but then this new generation came along and then f*cked it up. THEY RUINED SPONGEBOB DAMMIT!




"Who gives a flying f*ck about what people wear."

I am! Im tired of walking up a flight of stairs and seeing a black guy with his pants so low that his balls are bopping me in my forehead, and I bet that everyone else is too.




"if you “mistake” a 15 year old or younger kid for an 18 year old then you were probably pretty desperate yourself."

HEY, WOMEN DONT TAKE YOU SERIOUSLY WHEN YOUR LAST NAME IS 'BENCH' OK, THATS NOT MY FAULT





"is it worth killing that innocent, adorable baby for some political gain?"

Are you kidding? Id kill 9 innocent babies for a klondike bar so your argument is useless





Ok look, the point of killing off everyone under 16 is so that we will have A BREAK from all the crap they cause, which is my point.
xXCryptoXx

Con

My opponent never made it apparent that he was arguing from the stand point of “just wanting to take a break from children for several years”.


His arguments suggested that he would fix the problem of crappy children by killing off the bad batch, and raising the new one in a good way.


Due to this, it would seem like my opponent really presented new arguments in the last round.


However, I too, will present new arguments in the final round so that we may cancel each other out.


After all, it would seem I am arguing from a new position, which would require some new arguments.


Summary:


Both me and my opponent are basically at a stand still with our arguments.


I argue that even if we did kill everyone, the new batch of kids will be just as bad, and that babies are just too adorable to kill off like that.

My opponent argues that he just really wants a break, and that babies look like “potatoes that were left in the microwave too long”, and that he would “kill nine babies for a Klondike Bar”.


In other words, he argues it’s worth it.


My arguments:

Now, my opponent argues that he’ll get a break, but let’s get real here.


Not everyone like my psychopathic friend Imabench here will support killing off a bunch of children for a small break.


After all, babies are going to start being born immediately afterwards and the problem will only arise again.


People are going to enjoy that break so much and realize just how much better life is without children that all the Liberal (lolwut) college students (like Ima!), children haters, and people that just enjoyed the break will start petitioning and rioting to continue to kill off the babies for 5, 10, 20, 30 years! Eventually the lack of children will cause humanity to die out completely.

Or


People will realize that babies are just so adorable that the government (aren’t we in too much debt to fund killing off a bunch of children anyways?) is going to attempt to kill off the children, but all the people of the world will riot back, eventually destroying all government, therefore resulting in anarchy, and in return all the people of the world turning against each other, which in turn will result in nuclear war, which in turn will result in the apocalypse, which in turn will result in humanity dying out, or devolving into cockroaches to for their survival.

Or


The government attempts to kill of the children, the people of the world fail in fighting back, therefore putting the government into a dictatorship where we know all politicians and world leaders are terrible at their job, and in turn will become so power hungry that the world becomes their slave. Eventually the citizens will unite secretly, nuke the government, the government will nuke back, rinse and repeat apocalypse argument.

Or


People will still continue to secretly raise children, the government will find out, the people will rebel, rinse and repeat government rebellion/apocalypse argument.


Ima, it’s far too risky and babies are far too objectively cute to do this.


Thank you.

Debate Round No. 3
24 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
Not at all
Posted by GOP 4 years ago
GOP
Well, that's the nature of a joke debate, sir!!
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
it IS baseless because youre inventing your own damn wualifications for what is or isnt a source just because its a joke debate.

Just do me a favor GOP and refrain on voting on any of my debates.
Posted by GOP 4 years ago
GOP
Yeah but this voting this is based on the voters' opinion. By opinion, I mean an opinion that's not baseless. Mine was not baseless. The counter would have been justified if my opinion on the source was baseless.
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
Dingus, you've only been here two months and you're still trying to figure out how to not spam the forums with questions. Take a hint that you're wrong on this already
Posted by GOP 4 years ago
GOP
imabench,

if they were graphs, then this would be a serious thing. Since it was a picture, there was a sense of illogical humor.
Posted by Ragnar 4 years ago
Ragnar
I disagree with sources being not a possibility if only one side used them, yet I'd call sources on this tied since a single picture is not enough sources to tip anything.
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
Pictures aren't even sources though unless their graphs or something...

I'm fine with everything else but take off the source points otherwise ill get someone to counter dude
Posted by GOP 4 years ago
GOP
Well, I thought the picture was qualified enough to be a reliable source. I mean, even though your picture was not a good source, it was still a good attempt. imabench did not attempt that at all.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 4 years ago
xXCryptoXx
Actually GOP even I agree with Ima on the source point.

You should take it off.

Anyways, source points only go to whoever used more reliable sources, not who posted more sources.

In order to have more reliable sources the opponent must also post a source, because Ima had no need to the source points shouldn't be awarded to anyone at all.
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by PatriotPerson 4 years ago
PatriotPerson
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were more agreeable.
Vote Placed by FrackJack 4 years ago
FrackJack
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:20 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter
Vote Placed by GOP 4 years ago
GOP
imabenchxXCryptoXxTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: See comments.