The Instigator
TheGamer1998
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
zmikecuber
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

Sagging should be banned everywhere

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 4 votes the winner is...
zmikecuber
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 3/3/2014 Category: Health
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,130 times Debate No: 48246
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (4)

 

TheGamer1998

Pro

Sagging is just wrong and stupid. Do guys even think how they look when they sag. They look gay even if their straight. Sagging has never been cool. OKay? Noone wants to see a guys poop and pee stain masking their underwear or boxers. eventually, their going to take it too far and just stop wearing pants period.
zmikecuber

Con

Introduction
My opponent shall have the BoP to show that "Sagging should be banned everwhere."

Fallacies
My opponent has committed numerous logical fallacies.

"Sagging is just wrong and stupid."

This is a bare assertion fallacy. (1) Applying Hitchen's Razor that "What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence" (2) I simply dismiss this with the contrary assertion: Sagging is awesome and not stupid at all.

"Do guys even think how they look when they sag."

This is simply irrelevant, and counts as a Red-herring fallacy. (3)

"They look gay even if their straight. Sagging has never been cool. OKay?"

This is once again irrelevant, and is a bare assertion fallacy (1). Simply because it looks gay in my opponent's opinion, why does that mean we should ban it everywhere?

"Noone wants to see a guys poop and pee stain masking their underwear or boxers. eventually, their going to take it too far and just stop wearing pants period."

Perhaps we should make a ban on sagging while wearing poopy underwear then. It simply does not follow from this that we should ban sagging altogether. My opponent also makes a slippery-slope fallacy. (4)

Conclusion
My opponent has committed numerous logical fallacies, and as of yet has not presented one decent argument in favor of the resolution. Thus it remains unaffirmed.

Sources
(1) http://www.toolkitforthinking.com...
(2)http://www.goodreads.com...
(3)http://www.nizkor.org...
(4)http://www.nizkor.org...
Debate Round No. 1
TheGamer1998

Pro

If you were to come here, you would see how stupid it is. People walk around believing their looking cool. It started up in prison to say that their free for sex. But guess what, I don't do it and I'm not even busy half the time. I may have my old glasses back, but seeing people sagging makes me want to actually force myself to vomits. Even a tomboy girl does it. It makes them look like their walking like a freaking penguin. Its just plain stupid okay? I would honestly ban it if I could. I hate it, its disgustiing to see it. Over in Germany, I knew someone that sagged so badly that their butt was showing. I have another person in my 6th period class here now that is doing that same thing. My question to my opponent and all others is: Do you believe sagging should be banned or not? I say no because it will, can, and has been turned into public nudity without punishment. I can honestly say that in the near future, it will get to wear men walk out in public without pants and underwear. Where is this sane or right? Public nudity is illegal, therefore, so is sagging.
zmikecuber

Con

My opponent has dropped my rebuttals. Does this mean he concedes my arguments?

My opponent's second round can be divided into two parts:

Part 1
P1: Whatever I find disgusting ought to be banned.
P2: I find sagging disgusting
C: Sagging ought to be banned.

Obviously P1 has not been defended, and is simply an absurd assumption.

I can make a counter argument:

P1: Whatever I find acceptable ought to be allowed.
P2: I find sagging acceptable.
C: Sagging ought to be allowed.

Part 2
My opponent now equates sagging with nudity. However, such an equivocation is absurd. While some sagging may be nudity, we can't conclude that all sagging is nudity.

It is perfectly possible to sagg your pants without exposing yourself.

So my opponent has come nowhere near meeting his burden of proof.
Debate Round No. 2
TheGamer1998

Pro

Part 2 and my conclusion are correct. As you have accepted this argument, I now believe that you sag. I find it disgusting, I also find gay kissing disgusting, but I do not say that should be banned. Love is love. I am tired of seeing guys sagging, walking like a duck, and not bothering to pull up their pants before A: they trip; or B: their pants fall and the entire lower section is exposed. If you were to see from my point of view for this last argument, of which I ask of you to do, you don't have to as this was more interesting than being ignored. I believe it should be banned, but only for those that can afford or have a belt but choose not to use it properly, if they don't have the money to afford a belt or any fitting clothes, then they may be allowed to sag, if, and only if they don't have money to buy a belt or own one. I would at least like people to keep their pants up so A: their bare butts and other parts aren't showing; and B: Their underwear isn't showing either.
zmikecuber

Con

My opponent now seems to imply that sagging should only be banned against people who can afford a belt.

However, his reasons for banning this in the first place are still founded upon his personal dislike for it. As I've shown this is not a good reason to ban it altogether.

My opponent also proves my point when he says: "I would at least like people to keep their pants up so A: their bare butts and other parts aren't showing; and B: Their underwear isn't showing either."

Now clearly if the persons underwear is showing but their bare butt isn't, they're not nude. Thus, sagging cannot be the same as nudity, and my opponent's argument from nudity fails.

So all of my opponent's arguments have been refuted. Furthermore, his arguments are filled with logical fallacies as I have shown.

Please vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by brented 1 year ago
brented
I agree, what is the difference between partially showing off your underwear and fully showing it. If people are allowed to show off the majority of their boxers or underwear that what's to stop people from just running around in just their underwear? There is no difference. That has become the most ignorant fad that has passed from father to son in the last 20 something years.
Posted by GodChoosesLife 2 years ago
GodChoosesLife
Lol so does con really sag? Or was he playing devils advocate? This is kinda a funny debate.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 2 years ago
ESocialBookworm
"They look gay even if they're straight." Seriously? That's your point? I don't like guys who wear their pants like that either but calling them 'gay.' What are you? Twelve?
Posted by TheGamer1998 2 years ago
TheGamer1998
wow, since when, I've never really heard of the FBI on the site til now
Posted by invisibledeity 2 years ago
invisibledeity
I work for the FBI and I LOOK AT THIS SITE!!!
Posted by TheGamer1998 2 years ago
TheGamer1998
well, its not like the government actually looks at this site
Posted by DonWon 2 years ago
DonWon
Thanks man! Go win this! :D
Posted by zmikecuber 2 years ago
zmikecuber
Oh, no I know you're not trying to help him, I mean trying to help me might not be fair to him... :P

Sure, you can tell me when the debate is over if you'd like. I just think that banning something like this would be a ridiculous law and would be imposing on peoples' rights.
Posted by DonWon 2 years ago
DonWon
I'm not trying to help him I"m just telling you how I feel but if you want, I can tell you AFTER the debate is over.
Posted by zmikecuber 2 years ago
zmikecuber
I don't have the burden of proof. All I'm doing it refuting the arguments he presents.

And I don't think it'd be good conduct to help someone while a debate is going on.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Ragnar 2 years ago
Ragnar
TheGamer1998zmikecuberTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Spellcheck is useful, but for some cases I suggest using MS word since it checks the grammar a bit too. As the S&G issues distracted me too much causing large bias, I am only grading that right now (not that it matters when victory is already assured).
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 2 years ago
Krazzy_Player
TheGamer1998zmikecuberTied
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: Con brought up a better arguments in defending his case with reliable "sources" where as Pro presented only his "opinions" which were just bare assertion fallacies as shown by Con. S & G to Con as his usage of "syntax" and "diction" were better compared to Pro. Finally Pro lost conduct for directly attacking his opponent.
Vote Placed by codemeister13 2 years ago
codemeister13
TheGamer1998zmikecuberTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct goes to Con seeing as Pro committed multiple logical fallacies and attempted an ad hominem attack with "I now believe that you sag." Arguments go to Con for successfully refuting every one of Pro's and dismissing them as fallacies. S&G goes to Con for Pro's multiple incorrect uses of "their" instead of "they're." Sources go to Con for sourcing his quote and showing what types of fallacies were being presented.
Vote Placed by invisibledeity 2 years ago
invisibledeity
TheGamer1998zmikecuberTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: CON gets CONDUCT because PRO used personal attacks in the last round!! CON used sources. CON also showed pro's arguments to be faulty!