The Instigator
emilydebate
Con (against)
Losing
5 Points
The Contender
STALIN
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points

Should animals be kept in captivity?

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 4 votes the winner is...
STALIN
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/4/2014 Category: Science
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,263 times Debate No: 45198
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (4)

 

emilydebate

Con

I think animals should not be kept in captivity if their species is surviving on it's own.
STALIN

Pro

I think animals should be held in captivity in order to save endangered species.
Debate Round No. 1
emilydebate

Con

What if the species is not endangered? Like snakes for example, why should snakes be held captive when a species of snake is doing great in the wild. When snakes are kept as pets they could escape and become an invasive species such as the Burmese Python. That species then goes on to endanger the original snakes that already lived in that area.
STALIN

Pro

"What if the species is not endangered?"

But what if it is?

"Like snakes for example, why should snakes be held captive when a species of snake is doing great in the wild."

If the snake is disabled or sick and can't survive in the wild.

"That species then goes on to endanger the original snakes that already lived in that area."

This debate is about animals in general, not just about snakes.
Debate Round No. 2
emilydebate

Con

Your right, but I used snakes as an example that could happen to any species in the wild. Snakes in captivity are not always sick or hurt. Is it right to keep a perfectly healthy animal in captivity? You have no claims to that question. There are so many species that are fine, captivity may be a easy life but that is not what they were meant to do.
STALIN

Pro

STALIN forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by Elshara 3 years ago
Elshara
I support the starter of the debate. If we interfere too much as humans we dominate and manipulate the habitat of those whose survived our presence which is why many predators see us as a threat. Dogs and cats originated from larger species of relative genes, domestication is natural but the domesticated ones need our help to keep them alive otherwise they do what they can to make it in an alien environment. Animals should be free if they know how to interact with their surroundings in a feral to non feral ratio of moral judgment. believe it or not most animals can be sane, we need to decide whether it is up to us or us and them whether or not that sanity can be preserved.
Posted by emilydebate 3 years ago
emilydebate
Is that what animals are for "entertainment"? How about putting us on display, because someone from (insert random country) can't see us?
Posted by samadkins29 3 years ago
samadkins29
(I didn't accept this debate in time)
Animals should be held in captivity for a number or reasons. Since this is not a morality issue and rather an issue of why hold them captive if they are surviving in their normal habitat I will list reason relating to that only.

1) Its provides entertainment and way to see animals in person that would not normally see. You can also see them safely instead of being mauled to death by said animal.
2) Animals in zoo's are often animals that would take a long time to find in wild or whose natural habitat is physically unreachable to the average human.
3) Not everyone can afford a flight to (insert random country) to see the animal in wild
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by janetsanders733 3 years ago
janetsanders733
emilydebateSTALINTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Pro gave better reasons for keeping animals in captivity, as long as they are healthy, and not so much endangered.
Vote Placed by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
emilydebateSTALINTied
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 Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit
Vote Placed by whiteflame 3 years ago
whiteflame
emilydebateSTALINTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: I don't think either debater is really winning this argument. Both sides want to save endangered species differently. Both sides present uncited, unwarranted arguments towards that effect. There's no other argument in the round, but since Pro forfeited, Con wins conduct.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
emilydebateSTALINTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:10 
Reasons for voting decision: FF