The Instigator
senator2040
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
freedomfromoppression
Pro (for)
Winning
9 Points

Should their be a government?

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 3 votes the winner is...
freedomfromoppression
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/5/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 340 times Debate No: 72951
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (1)
Votes (3)

 

senator2040

Con

1. People don't need it
People are inherently good, the need for government especially when it has yet to prove itself nesseccary, is not there. People are able to make their own educated decisions and work for the good of humanity.

2. History shows us it works
In many parts of the world in the past there was legitley not government. The U.S. barley had one at the start and everything was great. People can live together peacefully without a ruling body.

3. Governments start violence
Governments are the ones that declare war and oppress people. Governments are inherently more violent then people who self govern themsleves.
freedomfromoppression

Pro

Government is a nesseccary evil. Just like taxes or regulations, we do it cause in the end, while majority of humans are good, some are still bad. There is still going to be that one business owner that charges everyone a high price, that mentally insane serial killer, or that sober guy who wants revenge for his wife cheating on him. Government is needed to keep the peace and prevent people from killing or harming each other in any way.
Debate Round No. 1
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by flash-man69 2 years ago
flash-man69
actually without knowing it all animals have there own system of govt since the beginning of time. like wolves follow there pack leader or how humans follow the oldest person for they are the wisest and make the appropriate decision for everyone. this concept has evolved over the years like making councils of the wisest to lead, making the strongest to protect everyone and enforce elders decisions, and everyone else provides food for there superiority over them. this changed over the years as the population increased the way people had to lead changed. it has now gotten out of hand because of bad leaders that corupt the govt. the govt isnt bad it is whos in charge is the problem
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by kingkd 2 years ago
kingkd
senator2040freedomfromoppressionTied
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:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Proved people arent inherently good
Vote Placed by Juris 2 years ago
Juris
senator2040freedomfromoppressionTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: Con has a heavy burden to prove his case. He presented 3 points but those were insufficient to support his case. Pro presented a simple and common argument, which is enough to win him this debate.
Vote Placed by AlternativeDavid 2 years ago
AlternativeDavid
senator2040freedomfromoppressionTied
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: Pro gets S&G because Con made typos throughout the debate, and even misspelled a word in the title. Pro also gets Sources because while neither made citations, Con made numerous bold claims that require sources. Neither side gets Arguments because I felt like the debate was too short for either side to prove anything. Con didn't meet his BoP, but Pro didn't disprove any claims made by Con either.