The Instigator
cheesedingo1
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Con (against)
Winning
24 Points

Sex

Do you like this debate?NoYes+5
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 5 votes the winner is...
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/20/2012 Category: Arts
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,702 times Debate No: 26410
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (15)
Votes (5)

 

cheesedingo1

Pro

Hello, and welcome to sex. Yes, sex. sex sex sex. That is what this debate is about!!! this debate is about sex. I am saying "PRO SEX", but my ignorant opponent "AlwaysMoreThanYou thinks sex is "BAD BAD BAD". What a fool.


This will be a 5 round debate. Since sex is so broad, and with with me, so LONG (aha), we need the max amount of rounds.

First round acceptance. COME AT ME BRO.
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

I accept. As this is a very serious and in no way lighthearted topic of discussion, I naturally assume that my opponent is approaching this debate with the gravest possible mindset.
Debate Round No. 1
cheesedingo1

Pro

Now, there are many arguments about sex. I am Completely PRO-SEX.

My opponent, In his insolence, thinks sex a bad thing. He must be a priest.

So alas: HERE COME IN THE CONTENTIONS.



1. IT IS LOVED BY SOOOOOOOO MANY:
Check out some of my sex debates:
1.http://www.debate.org...
I won, and I supported semen in food.

2.http://www.debate.org...
Imabench won this one, because it talked about us being able to have sex MORE without worries of pregnancies.

3. http://www.debate.org...
I don' even need to say anything about this one.

Tons of people love sex.
A. There are jobs about sex (i.e. Prostitutes, strippers, etc).

B.There are movies about sex. Almost every box office movie about sex sells like sex itself.

C.Sex is in our ears (not literally, unless you like that kinda stuff.) By in our ears, I mean that we listen to songs about sex. The majority of songs nowadays (that are popular) are about sex. Lil' Wayne, Enrique Iglesias, Flo Rida, Chris Brown, Rihanna, Big Sean, DJ Khaled, it's all they sing about.

D. It's what SELLS (in the news). When you read a newspaper or read news off the internet, do you see "Celebrity has SEX with another CELEBRITY in HOT AFFAIR", or "Celelbrity and another Celebrity are NOT having sex and are happy and virgin!". Nuff said.


2. IT FEEL'S GOOD.
Sex is so popular because IT FEELS GOOD. When you have sex are you like "Meh, never doing that again" or "God DAMN I gotta do that AGAIN!!!! WWWWOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOH!!!!!!!!" That is completely obvious. When something feel's good, do you say "oh my, that is bad!" or "HOLY CRAP THAT'S F*CKING AWESOME". Therefore, SEX IS GOOD AND SWELL.

3. Even the CHURCH IS GOOD WITH SEX!
Now, I know that my opponent is indeed catholic, and I know i'm kind of splittin' hairs, but I never said that I was talking about sex in or outside of marriage specifically. Sex makes babies! Without babies, NO HUMAN RACE. God LIKES HUMANS. Therfore, HE LIKES SEX. SEX GOOD. INSIDE OF MARRAIGE, BUT STILL GOOD! BWAAAAAAAAAAAAAH.


Sorry for not trolling more, I will do so more next round, but for now I hand the reigns over to my opponent.

Thank you, and GOOD LUCK

YOU'LL NEED IT
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

For starters, I would like to point out that my moronic sexaholic of an opponent made an ad hominem attack against me in Round 1. Observe:

"my ignorant opponent "AlwaysMoreThanYou" - cheesedingo1

I would never have the audacity to make such a rude comment as that. This is clear testimony that sex is bad, because if it was good my opponent wouldn't have to resort to such petty jibes to counter the arguments I haven't made yet.

I will address the rest of my opponent's "arguments" in order, then add some uncontendable contentions of my own.

Pre-Argument Remarks:

Pro writes "My opponent, In his insolence, thinks sex a bad thing. He must be a priest."

False. I am Archbishop, not a priest [1]. My opposition to sex has absolutely nothing to do with my deep, buried envy of all the people having sex while I pray alone in the Cathedral meditating on my vows of celibacy and chastity. ABSOLUTELY NOTHING, DO YOU HEAR? WHY ARE YOU BRINGING UP THESE ISSUES ANYWAY? I'M NOT ENVIOUS! I DON'T FEEL EMASCULATED!

Contention One: It is loved by soooooooo many

This entire contention is an appeal to popularity therefore it can be rejected fully.

Sex Debates

All these debates prove are that people debated on sexual topics. They say nothing about the popularity of sex.

There are jobs about sex

So what? There are also jobs about garbage collection and disposal, but I don't really think that would qualify garbage as "loved by soooooooo many".

There are movies about sex

Turn. This is all a giant conspiracy by the Jews who control Hollywood and the media [2][3][4][5]. They're trying to take over the world by tricking us into having sex, because sex is bad. The high attendance at these movies are merely proof that they are succeeding in their deception.

Sex is in our ears

Cross-apply my irrefutable point about the Jewish conspiracy to dominate the world by making us think sex is good.

It's what SELLS

Again, cross-apply my point about the Jewish conspiracy. It is undeniable from all the evidence that my opponent posts that we are being deceived by a Zionist conspiracy to embrace sex, which is actually evil.

In conclusion, not only is this entire contention an appeal to popularity, but it clearly showcases the brainwashing of the public by Jews. Since we all know you wouldn't brainwash someone into thinking that something good is good, we can infer that sex is bad and we're just being manipulated into thinking it's good.

Wait, did I say "we"? I mean, "you're just being manipulated". I'm not. I'm above this.

Contention Two: It feels good

Turn. Anything that feels good is bad for you (obviously). When was the last time you ate a a garden full of brussel sprouts? If you're sane, the answer will be "never". When was the last time you ate something sweet and unhealthy? Unless you're some kind of saint, probably quite recently. Things that taste good are bad for you. Things that taste bad are good for you. This applies to everything.

I think it would feel good to tie my opponent to his bed and... yeah, I'll leave that to your imagination.

Point: Everything that feels good is bad, and everything that feels bad is good.

You can easily notice this by seeing how guilty and bad people feel after sex is over [6][7]. That's because they knew it was bad, just like you (yes, you) know that eating that entire box of donuts yesterday was bad. It just felt too good for them (and you) to resist.

Contention Three: Even the Church is good with sex

No, it's not, and my opponent obviously does not understand the Church. The Church's infallible Magisterium is composed of old virgin men, it's common sense that they're not good with sex. Throughout the years, they've been steadily outlawing more and more forms of sex, and eventually it will get to the point where they outlaw all sex.

God obviously does not like humans, or else He wouldn't have made the world so hostile to human life. His eventual goal is clearly to make us extinct, so the only way we can please Him is by helping ourselves die out.

Sex is never good. Sex is always bad.

Counter-Contention One: Jewish conspiracy

I've already touched quite heavily on this in my thorough refutation of Pro's Contention One. There is a clear Jewish conspiracy to make us love sex. Conspiracies are bad. You don't conspire to make someone like something that's good for them, so obviously this is typical media treachery trying to brainwash us into sexbots, which will then be sold to aliens on Mars [8].

Counter-Contention Two: Natural Law

It is quite clear that existence entails suffering. There is no human on earth who has not suffered in some minor form. Therefore, I hold that causing people to exist is immoral because it increases the total amount of suffering.

Sex causes people to exist, therefore it is immoral. Also, it feels good which means it's bad. In the form of a syllogism:

Premise One: Existence entails suffering
Premise Two: Causing needless suffering is immoral
Premise Three:
Sex causes existence

Conclusion:
Sex is immoral


Counter-Contention Three: Division

Sex causes so much division. Sex causes drama. Causing division and drama are prima facie immoral, so sex is immoral too, because it causes division and drama.

We need only look at the recent case of Amanda Todd. Amanda Todd. Sex. Think about it.

Also, you have people like me. I suffer great mental anguish because of sex. If sex didn't exist, I wouldn't have to grip my rosary so tightly that it bites into my flesh and mutter Latin prayers to prevent sinful thoughts entering my mind every time I think of cheesedingo1.

Conclusion:

I have clearly refuted all my opponent's fallacious points, as well as drawing up three irrefutable contentions.

Sources:
1. http://debate.org...
2. http://rense.com...
3. http://rense.com...
4. http://iamthewitness.com...
5. http://www.stormfront.org...
6. http://www.tressugar.com...
7. http://www.nytimes.com...
8. http://www.dailymail.co.uk...
Debate Round No. 2
cheesedingo1

Pro

My oh my. I am cutting this close. Not enough hours in a day, nor days in a week. Nontheless, I will not give up without a struggle. I VOW TO WIN.

This is clear testimony that sex is bad, because if it was good my opponent wouldn't have to resort to such petty jibes to counter the arguments I haven't made yet.
Well, my opponent is relating being rude and sex in ways that are not compatible. I'm afraid it is he who complains with his "petty jibes".

False. I am Archbishop, not a priest.
Well, I'm afraid that isn't possible. Your profile says you are "17 years of age". Well, you are not able to even be a bishop until you are at least 25 years old[1], much less an archbishop. My opponent is a lier, and doesn't know what he's talking about, therefore, his arguments are meaningless. Now, I ON THE OTHER HAND, am a trained assassin by freedo and the KFC guild, and there is NO age limit for that. THEREFORE, I AM SUPREME.



C1:
This entire contention is an appeal to popularity therefore it can be rejected fully.
That's what this debate is about. Can one argue that it is a fact that sex is bad? A fool, only, could try to argue something so insolent. Sex is GOOD. That is popular beleif.

Sex Debates:
Ah, but they do. Look at all the views they have! SO SO MANY. Very..... POPULAR, WOULDN'T YOU SAY?!?!?!?!?

Jobs of sex:
HEY B!TCH. I LOVE GARBAGE. To quote a wise man, "Garbage is good" -Oscar the Grouch. How dare you offend me and my garbage fetish.

There are movies:
Meaningless squabble. Nothing but conspiracies. The only thing that seems influenced, or should i say, inJEWanced, (NOT THAT FUNNY), is the Possession movie that came out recently, which is basically a crappy remake of the exorcist except with jews instead of catholics.

Ear sex:
Cross apply my arguments.

What sells:
Again, cross apply my arguments on Jews.


C2:
Brussel sprouts are fvcking delicious. As you can see, ladies and gentleman, my opponent hates brussel sprouts and garbage. He does not know at all what he's talking about. Next he'll be saying how he's and Archbishop!.... wait....

Anyways, I find many fruits and veggies delicious. Vegiterians love them, and they are quite healthy people. Only certain things that taste good are bad. Candy can be good, too, actually. Dark Chocolate: GOOD FOR THE HEART. Fact. and it's fuckin delicious. Your argument: DONE.



I think it would feel good to tie my opponent to his bed and... yeah, I'll leave that to your imagination.
AHA. And I imagine he has SEX WITH ME. YES, HOT GLORIOUS SEX. AND HE IS AN ARCHBISHOP. HE LEAVES IT TO MY IMAGINATION, and since he is an archbishop, as in a high member of the church, and ties me to my bed and has glorious heart pounding sex with me, he helps my argument on how the church is good with it as well. THANK YOU.


C3:
The church also consists of the lay people. And let me tell you, ALOT OF LAY PEOPLE HAVE SEX. Just look at what they are called. LAY PEOPLE. Lay. Sex. SAME THING. They should basically be called SEX PEOPLE.

Counter contention 1:
I have already attacked this argument, and will do better next round, and broaden it.

CC2:
So, creating people to make them suffer is bad. Well, condoms then! Sex without making people feels good, and no bringing babies into the world that have to suffer! BEAT YOU WITH SEX.

Conclusion: Sex is moral AND glourious.

CC3:
Sex causes devision all right, dividing her LEGS APART! .....god, that was awful. I'm really out of my game.
Amanda todd killed herself because of bleach. BLEACH. Bleach doesn't taste good. She thought it would taste good. She thought sex was bad because it caused her to kill herself, but it was actually GLORIOUS. SHE IS WRONG.

You suffer mental anguish because you have to try not to think about sex? AHA. Cause it is so...... AWESOME. If you just let it enter you mind, and enter other parts of your body, the easier it will be on you! CAUSE SEX IS GOOD. My opponent helps me out with this. He is saying it is hard to resist it, becausev it is SO GOOD.

Oh, and AlwaysMoreThanYou, I thought we agreed to keep our mad passionate sexual love life out of this. Geez, your a blabbermouth. If you don't keep it down, I'll go back to Zaradi.


CHEESEDINGO OUT.







[1] http://en.wikipedia.org...
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

"[It] goes in, [it] goes out... you can't explain that." - Bill O'Reilly on the enigma of sex

Pre-Argument Remarks:

Pro writes "Well, my opponent is relating being rude and sex in ways that are not compatible. I'm afraid it is he who complains with his "petty jibes"."

See? My opponent is trying to slander my good name! It is clear he has no valid counters to my arguments, so he has to resort to pathetic ad hominem.

Pro writes "Well, I'm afraid that isn't possible. Your profile says you are "17 years of age"."

I suppose you believe 1dustpelt to be 99 years old [1]? Profiles are not always accurate.

Pro writes "much less an archbishop"

There is no functional difference between an archbishop and a bishop.

Pro writes "My opponent is a lier, and doesn't know what he's talking about"

See? Ad hominem! I actually am a liar, but that has no bearing on the actual debate.

Contention One: It is loved by soooooooo many

My opponent makes the rather unusual argument that this debate is about an appeal to popularity. It's not. Observe the resolution, reproduced here for your convenience:

"Sex" - The Resolution [2]

It doesn't say "Sex is loved by a lot of people".

My opponent then tries to justify his appeal to popularity by saying "Sex is GOOD. That is popular beleif.", however that is merely a textbook example of what an argumentum ad populum is.

Sex Debates

No, I sure wouldn't. Look at the main page of Debate.org [3], and scroll down to where it says "Popular Searches". The most popular search is George Bush. That hardly makes him popular, although I anticipate that my opponent will say otherwise. Also, look at this video [4], which has more views than any of those debates. However, it is hated.

Definition of 'popular': "regarded with favor, approval, or affection by people in general" [5]. Being viewed a lot just makes it known, not necessarily regarded with favor or approval.

There are jobs about sex

My opponent has presented this [6]. This argument fails to support your point, because regardless of whether or not you love garbage, this doesn't necessarily show that garbage is loved by so many.

Just by you and Oscar.

There are movies about sex

Pro writes "Nothing but conspiracies."

Exactly! Nothing but Jewish conspiracies dominating the media and influencing minds. I provided numerous sources giving evidence in favor of Zionist control over the media [7][8], and I am frankly unsurprised that my opponent dropped that argument almost completely, because it clearly cannot be refuted.

Sex is in our ears

My opponent has plagiarized my argument from Round 2, where I wrote "Cross-apply my irrefutable point". Obviously, he thought he could trick me by removing the hyphen and changing "irrefutable point" to "arguments" (because his arguments are quite refutable). However, I picked up on it and I hope the readers do as well.

It's what SELLS

Pro writes "Again, cross apply my arguments on Jews."

It is quite clear that this is blatant plagiarism. In Round 2, I wrote "Again, cross-apply my point about the Jewish conspiracy.". By removing the hyphen, changing "point" to "arguments", and modifying "Jewish conspiracy" to "Jews", my opponent has tried to turn my own argument against me.

I am shocked that my opponent has the audacity to steal my arguments when all the readers need to do is scroll up one round to see that they were quite clearly mine.

Contention Two: It feels good

Pro writes "Brussel sprouts are fvcking delicious."

This is clear evidence that my opponent is a liar. He knows he doesn't like brussel sprouts, I know he doesn't like brussel sprouts, and you know he doesn't like brussel sprouts. He's trying to counter my uncounterable point by claiming brussel sprouts are delicious, but they certainly are not. If anyone reading this has tried a brussel sprout, they will see why this pathetic response fails.

Pro writes "Anyways, I find many fruits and veggies delicious. Vegiterians love them, and they are quite healthy people."

Lies. I am actually a vegetarian, and I hate vegetables. I am also unhealthy, because I eat processed foods all the time. Nature. Yuck.

Pro writes "Dark Chocolate: GOOD FOR THE HEART."

Dark chocolate doesn't taste that good either. That stuff is bitter as hell.

Pro writes "And I imagine he has SEX WITH ME."

This shows my opponent has had his mind brainwashed by Jews. Nothing could have been further from the implications I intended to give by writing what I wrote.

Pro writes "AND HE IS AN ARCHBISHOP."

My opponent has contradicted himself. With regards to my claim to be an Archbishop, he wrote "Well, I'm afraid that isn't possible." [2].

Either I'm an Archbishop or I'm not. My opponent cannot have it both ways.

Contention Three: Even the Church is good with sex

Lay people are fallible. The Magisterium is infallible. The Magisterium is composed of old virgin men.

Also, I have discovered a novel argument against my opponent. While the Church so far is okay with marital sex, marital sex actually does not exist and is merely a myth [9]. Any married man can tell you this is true.

So the Church has managed to oppose all forms of sex by allowing a form of sex that doesn't actually exist, and hoping that no one would notice. My argument here stands.

Counter-Contention One: Jewish Conspiracy

If by "attacked" my opponent means "wrote a couple of unsubstantiated lines in rebuttal to brilliant arguments and walls of sources", then I suppose my opponent did "attack" this argument.

Counter-Contention Two: Natural Law

Condoms have a failure rate, as I'm sure you know [10]. Thus, my argument stands. Babies will still be created, just at a much lower rate. It is still immoral, because it still causes people to exist.

Counter-Contention Three: Division

Pro writes "I'm really out of my game."

I agree.

Pro writes "SHE IS WRONG."

Prove it.

My opponent has failed to respond to my arguments that sex causes division and and drama, which are prima facie immoral. In fact, he has agreed that sex does cause "devision", so I think this argument should probably be extended. Yes. Extend my argument.

Pro writes "You suffer mental anguish because you have to try not to think about sex? AHA. Cause it is so...... AWESOME."

Non-sequitur.

Pro writes "He is saying it is hard to resist it, becausev it is SO GOOD."

No, I'm saying it's hard to resist because it's powerful. Resisting a building falling on you and crushing you flat is hard to resist, yet not good.

Pro writes "Oh, and AlwaysMoreThanYou, I thought we agreed to keep our mad passionate sexual love life out of this. Geez, your a blabbermouth. If you don't keep it down, I'll go back to Zaradi."

FINE! LEAVE ME! SEE IF I CARE! :'(

Conclusion:

Heheh. Extend my argument.

Sources:
1. http://www.debate.org...
2. http://debate.org...;
3. http://www.debate.org...;
4. http://bit.ly...;
5. http://dictionary.reference.com...;
6. http://www.handsoffhaywoodhigh.org.uk...;
7. http://www.atlanteanconspiracy.com...;
8. http://www.jewishjournal.com...
9. http://answers.yahoo.com...;
10. http://www.americanpregnancy.org...
Debate Round No. 3
cheesedingo1

Pro

cheesedingo1 forfeited this round.
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

Extend all arguments.
Debate Round No. 4
cheesedingo1

Pro

cheesedingo1 forfeited this round.
AlwaysMoreThanYou

Con

In conclusion, sex is bad.
Debate Round No. 5
15 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
It doesn't say how I'm AlwaysMoreThanYou, though. I could be always more of an idiot than you.
Posted by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
I think Con's username is an implied ad hominem.
Posted by haert09 4 years ago
haert09
Hello My Dear,
I am well pleased to contact you after viewing your profile today through my mail contact mail address is
hamisikipkalye(@)yahoo(dot)com) give me your mail for easy contact send it directly to my mail box now and i will add you ok
God bless you.
Yours friend.
hamisi
Posted by haert09 4 years ago
haert09
hie
Posted by cheesedingo1 4 years ago
cheesedingo1
Holy Sh!t.
Posted by cheesedingo1 4 years ago
cheesedingo1
Hey SHUT UP ZARADI.
Posted by Zaradi 4 years ago
Zaradi
Dingo, you're rusty. These comments are more trollish than your first round.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Yes. Yes it would.
Posted by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
That would explain why you're consistently more than everyone else.
Posted by AlwaysMoreThanYou 4 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
Oh, it is. All of my arguments are, you know.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by Heineken 4 years ago
Heineken
cheesedingo1AlwaysMoreThanYouTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: FF
Vote Placed by Nur-Ab-Sal 4 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
cheesedingo1AlwaysMoreThanYouTied
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: "In conclusion, sex is bad."
Vote Placed by philochristos 4 years ago
philochristos
cheesedingo1AlwaysMoreThanYouTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: Pro bailed, failing to refute Con's arguments or defend his own. Con made a seemingly irrefutable argument that Pro never answered, namely, that sex causes life, life is suffering, it is immoral to cause suffering, therefore, it is immoral to have sex. Pro failed to refute that argument. It alone won the debate for Con. Some of Con's other arguments were fallacious. For example, Con misapplied the fallacy of argument ad populum.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
cheesedingo1AlwaysMoreThanYouTied
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 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: ff
Vote Placed by emospongebob527 4 years ago
emospongebob527
cheesedingo1AlwaysMoreThanYouTied
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 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: Sexy, sexual sex.