The Instigator
davideh29
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Haasenfeffor
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Resolved: Gays should be put down

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  
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: 2/14/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,713 times Debate No: 14775
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (1)
Votes (2)

 

davideh29

Pro

I await the challenge!
Haasenfeffor

Con

Let us descend onto this arguement. I woudl like to point out that while Gay's are an inferior race, they should not be cured with death, rather they should be forced to be seperated from society and forced to work to labor for the benefit of the common good. Debate begins next round. Let us all fight for our case with valiance. Good luck to you sir!
Debate Round No. 1
davideh29

Pro

I would like to begin my part of this debate by outlining a few key points.;
1. Gays are so inferior to all organisms their mere prescence is harmful to both national and global security.
If you think about it, whenever you are near a gay you just think OMFG ITS A GAY and you get distracted which can lead to harm. Now, if a gay were to be viewed on international television so many people would become distracted that the world would fall into chaos.
2. Gays are so inferior they do not deserve life.
These 1/14th humans are not alive therefore they shoudl die.
3. Gays are so inferior that if they were to labor as you suggested, their work would cause more harm than good.
When forced to work, they would merely refuse to work efficiently and safely which will lead to putting themselves in harmful situations and die anywaysm, so why not just put them down in the first place.
Therefore i urge the voters to affrim the resolution.
Haasenfeffor

Con

Before I begin, I would like to point out that my opponent has yet to offer a single shred of proof to back up his claims, he seems to be going with the juvenile tactic of hurling as many contentions as possible into the opposition's face in an attempt to catch them unprepared. I therefore, will not be. Let me begin by negating my opponents contentions.

"1. Gays are so inferior to all organisms their mere prescence is harmful to both national and global security.
If you think about it, whenever you are near a gay you just think OMFG ITS A GAY and you get distracted which can lead to harm. Now, if a gay were to be viewed on international television so many people would become distracted that the world would fall into chaos."
My opponent is correct is bellieving that Gays are inferior to the heterosexual people. The very idea of homosexuality involves two of the same gender, thus no reproduction can occur, thus making them inferior in evolution, as they would only be wiped out in a few generations. Therefore, rather than supporting my opponent, this contention merely strengthens my own case,

"2. Gays are so inferior they do not deserve life.
These 1/14th humans are not alive therefore they shoudl die."
Once again, my opponent offers no proof, only opinion. What my opponent does not understand that, while the homosexuals should be kept separate from the heterosexuals, putting them to death goes too far. Why kill them when we can put them to work, to benefit the economy. Free labor from the gays would boost production, and would create more jobs to handle the influx of produce, which would lead to more product being bought, which would lead to more jobs. After all, my opponent says they are no more than animals, but don't animals have protection laws as well? The homosexuals should be treated the same, separate, but not to the extreme of death. That's animal cruelty!

"3. Gays are so inferior that if they were to labor as you suggested, their work would cause more harm than good.
When forced to work, they would merely refuse to work efficiently and safely which will lead to putting themselves in harmful situations and die anywaysm, so why not just put them down in the first place."

My opponent does not see the benefit that a strong, labor force would have. For one, the opposition says that people working hurts the economy? Now certainly, that is one argument I have never heard before. Rather, it could only help it, as I will address in my own contentions.

1. Killing the slaves instead of enslaving them will deprive the economy a chance to flourish. Back before the civil war, when slavery was still occurring, slavery effected the economy by making money for Americans and plantation owners, through cotton, tobacco, and other goods. When Eli Whitney invented the cotton gin, the need for slaves increased, and more had to be imported from Africa. This made money for the slave sellers, and also the American slave owners, because slave owners were able to produce more cotton. Think of that change back then, and put it into every aspect of our economy today, and see the impact that it would have!

2. Killing homosexuals is animal cruelty. My opponent himself states that they are like animals, yet even animals have protection! So should the gays! The idea that homosexuals should be submitted to a punishment that not even animals have to endure is barbaric!

2. My final contention is that killing the gays would result in public backlash. Many homosexuals in the world today are, as you say, in the eyes of the public. To kill those the public holds dear would be tantamount to political suicide to the government of the United States. So saying, I urge the readers to negate the resolution. Thank you.
Debate Round No. 2
davideh29

Pro

davideh29 forfeited this round.
Haasenfeffor

Con

By forfeiting this round, i take it that my opponent has conceded.
Debate Round No. 3
davideh29

Pro

davideh29 forfeited this round.
Haasenfeffor

Con

By forfeiting this round, i take it that my opponent has realized that his arguements are wrong.
Debate Round No. 4
davideh29

Pro

davideh29 forfeited this round.
Haasenfeffor

Con

My opponent forfeits!
Debate Round No. 5
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by SpeakYourMind 6 years ago
SpeakYourMind
This is terrible.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 6 years ago
quarterexchange
davideh29HaasenfefforTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: This was so stupid
Vote Placed by boredinclass 6 years ago
boredinclass
davideh29HaasenfefforTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Not only is this offensive, but you forfeited all your rounds.