The Instigator
Herecomesthedoge
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
KingDebater
Con (against)
Winning
7 Points

Roads kill is better than art

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 2 votes the winner is...
KingDebater
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/19/2014 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 570 times Debate No: 44233
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

Herecomesthedoge

Pro

This is the round of acceptance. I think road kill is better because its edible. Also it's like a tattoo for the road and teaches you how easy it is to be killed.
KingDebater

Con

I accept, roadkill dude!
Debate Round No. 1
Herecomesthedoge

Pro

I prefer road kill for the following reasons. It's easily disposable. You can just pick it up and throw it away without worrying about how much its worth. Also road kill teaches you about death. How easy it is to die in an instant.you also learn the anatomy of an animal by seeing its guts fall out and seeing its brains.roadkill is edible as you can just scoop it of the road and eat it.roadkill is also more interesting than today's modern art as you can just sit there in disgust looking at it. With modern art you look in disgust at how it's considered art but its just not the same.
KingDebater

Con

You can consume real art too [1]. It feels "nice and warm".

Art is like a tattoo for the whole universe to enjoy. Actually, it's more like a tattoo for the canvas and canvases are better than roads so art is better than roadkill.

Art can teach you how easy it is to be killed as well. It can have a hidden meaning behind it.

Pro says roadkill is good ebcause it's disposable, but with art it doesn't need to be disposable because you don't want to dispose of it, you want to keep it.

Roadkill is gross because you can see the brains and guts! Yuck!

Also, in order to create roadkill a vehicle needs to go over it which means that one vehicle driver will have a small bump, which would be a bit annoying, whereas art is not even a bit annoying.

Thank you.

Sources
[1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 2
Herecomesthedoge

Pro

Roadkill is very easy to make. Just run over the animal then you've got roadkill. Whereas art, you spend years making one painting. Also using the dailymail isn't the best source for facts. Drinking paint can kill you while eating roadkill wouldn't. Drinking 3 gallons of blood wouldn't kill you but drinking the same amount of paint would easily kill a human. Not very much people dispose of roadkill for a while as you can see on the motorway or highway.
KingDebater

Con

With roadkill, first you need to find a stupid animal. That can be a hard task depending on where you live.

Art can be made out of anything, whereas roadkill can only be made out of animals, so it's easier to find the things you need or can have to do art.

About time, it will be worth it but with modern art, not only does it not take very long to make but you can have fun doing it. It can be made just by flicking paint at a wall.



Also, art can be made anywhere, not just on the road, unlike roadkill.

Not being able to eat as much of art is good because it means that it will be preserved for other people to see and enjoy.

Thank you.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
Why are you debating with arthurblue...
Posted by KingDebater 3 years ago
KingDebater
Roadkill is sick.

It's worse than art!
Posted by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
Sick...
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by STALIN 3 years ago
STALIN
HerecomesthedogeKingDebaterTied
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:02 
Reasons for voting decision: sources
Vote Placed by SeventhProfessor 3 years ago
SeventhProfessor
HerecomesthedogeKingDebaterTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Con provided sources and successfully rebutted Pro's arguments, while Pro did not even attempt to rebut any of Con's.