The Instigator
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
WilliamSchulz
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Should Families Go To Prison After It Was Proven They Literally Ate Their Children (The Roast Game)?

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/12/2017 Category: Society
Updated: 8 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 833 times Debate No: 104961
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (45)
Votes (0)

 

BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2

Pro

Yes, I believe that every family should go to prison for literally eating their own children as their "Christmas Roast" as proven in a debate and a poll (links down below). Families have been eating their own children for 19 years. They ate them after they slaughtered them, took the dead child's (his or her) fecal matter out, cut parts that families think that are most edible and eat it (pretty much the whole child, child by child). They only throw away the bones and get away with it, which I believe is the most inhumane crime in human history. I believe America was the first country to condone the slaughtering and eating of children for not believing in Christmas. They should also be sentenced to death for such a horrific crime they committed for 19 years. Then, we should see those families die the most painful death for the most horrific crime they ever committed in human history. Then we should remember the children that were lost from such a horrific crime.

Links to my debate and poll:
[1] http://www.debate.org...

[2] http://www.debate.org...
WilliamSchulz

Con

Thank you for challenging me to this debate, and I hope this will lead viewers in the right direction.

Undoubtably, child eating is a horrific crime and I would have no problem sending people to prison for such a deed. However, saying that families eat their children for Christmas Roast is not only false, but misleading! I checked out your first debate, in which you outlined your original question to the family members. You asked what was special about a holiday roast, to which the members chose ham...(etc) Your second question was "Who or what do you think is special?" To which the responce was children.

The family member has done nothing wrong in the responce here, and your assumption that Family eats children for Christmas Roast is false! Let me prove it to you, you first question is simple, and fair by nature. Your second one is too. However, just because a person answers (a) and (b) does not always make (c). It would be like if I said that my computer was grey and I could type on it, so I must have stolen it from an Apple store. Your ends do not follow your premises! Therefore, your argument is invalid and misleading. If I was a family member, I would freak out myself, because I would expect no person to think that I would eat my own children! If I did, wouldn't you tell by (a) the stench (b) the blood somewhere or (c) the fact that I have less children that I did before?

Finally, you provide no evidence for all of your claims above, so I see no reason to believe that America was first to condone this or that families have been doing this for 19 years.

In this round, I attacked the debate itself and the credidentials of Brian's claims. In the next round, I will provide my own sources to prove that this Brian's argument is false and that any cases of this are not in America, or if in America, limited and few.
Debate Round No. 1
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2

Pro

Thank you con, but you still don't understand or comprehend the the topic. What I'm trying to say that families should be arrested and put to prison for the proven crimes they committed. I'm not talking about just refuting real debate proof and poll proof and just to refute the rest of the argument.

Without further ado, let me get into my first rebuttals.

1. "Undoubtably, child eating is a horrific crime and I would have no problem sending people to prison for such a deed. However, saying that families eat their children for Christmas Roast is not only false, but misleading! I checked out your first debate, in which you outlined your original question to the family members. You asked what was special about a holiday roast, to which the members chose ham...(etc) Your second question was "Who or what do you think is special?" To which the response was children." Perhaps, I stated those questions and answers in that debate, though it is not misleading or false.

2. "The family member has done nothing wrong in the responce here, and your assumption that Family eats children for Christmas Roast is false! Let me prove it to you, you first question is simple, and fair by nature. Your second one is too. However, just because a person answers (a) and (b) does not always make (c)." Unfortunately, you made a spelling error, and poor analogy.

3. "if I said that my computer was grey and I could type on it, so I must have stolen it from an Apple store." Also, I'm sorry that it's not my fault that you can't take my evidence as fact or legitimate.

4. "If I was a family member, I would freak out myself, because I would expect no person to think that I would eat my own children! If I did, wouldn't you tell by (a) the stench (b) the blood somewhere or (c) the fact that I have less children that I did before?" Exactly, that's whole point of the game, don't attack the game, play the game.

My conclusion is, families should go to prison, the game was proven before.
So, vote pro!
WilliamSchulz

Con

Thank you for your argument's / rebuttals. I will begin by making my points and then structuring my own rebuttals.

First off, you state that I don't play the game, and that I attack the argument itself. However, considering the nature of your debate, the only thing to attack is the argument. Let me explain. First, your debate consists of a problem / solution, namely that if a family eats their child, they should go to prison. This is not up for debate! As a rational person, if a person murders another person, they must be punished for it with no alternative. Therefore, your debate can't be called into question, but the nature of your debate can be called into question, as previously mentioned above in Round 1.

Rebuttal in Defense:

1. "Perhaps I stated those questions and answers in that debate, though it is not misleading or false." This is true.

2. "Unfortunately, you made a spelling error and poor analogy." Can you explain further on this? Where is the mistake, and what is bad about the analogy?

3. "Also, I'm sorry that it's not my fault that you can't take my evidence as fact or legitimate." That would be true, but you provided no evidence to begin with, which is why I stated in Round 1 and the comments asking for some studies or facts.

4. "Exactly, that's the whole point of the game, don't attack the game, play the game." I attacked the game because the premises were flawed, and what is there to play about the game except for laying out make believe evidence to help back your claims?

Because you did not provide any evidence to support your original claim, you did not fulfill the Burden of Proof, and you raised more discrepancies than you solved. Therefore, I urge all viewers to vote con.
Debate Round No. 2
45 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 8 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
@frankfurter50 I have proven it in the links I made in my first round argument.
So, shut up and leave me alone.
Also, I blocked you from challenging me to anymore debates.

So, have a nice day, you piece of s**t.
Posted by frankfurter50 8 months ago
frankfurter50
Tying isn't winning. He wins just as much as you do.

One source.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 8 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
*bursts out laughing* I still win the debate, though it is a tie.
I still protect the win of my previous roast game debate
Yamaha banana haha haha

' '
\/

Happy smiley face!
Posted by frankfurter50 8 months ago
frankfurter50
One source.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 8 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
@cherrypalm You must be dreaming right now, I'm the pro, not you.
Posted by Cherrypalm 8 months ago
Cherrypalm
I made comments about Bryan's debates which proves the debate in his sources, I thought I was the pro in this, sorry.
Posted by Cherrypalm 8 months ago
Cherrypalm
@frankfurter50 OK, let's keep this debate a tie, still means that I'm right about the roast game and proven it in those sources in my first argument.
Posted by frankfurter50 8 months ago
frankfurter50
Sources aren't valid if they're created by YOU. That's the way that evidence works.

The debate will be a tie because nobody votes, and it doesn't mean you're right.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 8 months ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
@frankfurter50 Actually you're nuts, you're the one who keeps asking for "evidence" but ignores the fact that I gave sources in my debate, if its not a link, that would be different.
The debate will still be a tie anyway, just a heads up.
Posted by frankfurter50 8 months ago
frankfurter50
You provided one of YOUR DEBATES and one of YOUR POLLS. Neither of those prove anything. Provide a link to a news article or something from SOMEONE ELSE. Trust me, if there's a mass genocide like this, there will be something about it online. You had to have found out about this somewhere. Give us proof, and everyone will stop picking on you. Otherwise, you're nuts.
No votes have been placed for this debate.