Sniperjake1994 is a conservative.

I affirm.

Sniperjake1994 is a conservative. Why? Because his profile says so. He is against gay marriage, abortion, and gun bans. He is also pro for President Bush, War in Afghanistan, and War in Iran. These are characteristics of a conservative. Therefore because he believes in these he is a conservative. I'll wait for an opponent. Thank you.

I negate.

"Because his profile says so."

The key reason presented by the PRO is woefully inconclusive, their is no guarantee that one individuals put on their profile is 100% fact. And I actually have evidence to prove otherwise, I am not 19 years old, as my profile says, rather I am 14. I am not from West Palm Beach, rather Palm Beach. And most untrue of all was my intent in joining this website, it was not to network it was to pick up girls. So because we can not verify the audacious claim of the PRO we must drop it on face.

"He is against gay marriage, abortion, and gun bans."

He is also a fan of medical marijuana, drug legalization, social security, social programs. So we can conclude two things:

A) His views are varied, under the big issues column it divides his opinion into 51.72 Agree and 48.28 Disagree this would lead one to conclude that rather than being a conservative he is an independent.

B) We don't know the accuracy of these claims, so he could actually be a 100% liberal, but we just don't know because there is no way to authenticate these statements.

so once again we can not infer that he is a conservative so we can negate.

"He is also pro for President Bush, War in Afghanistan, and War in Iran."

I personally feel that President Bush was not a complete failure, the War in Afghanistan serves some purpose, and the War in Iran was started on good intentions. But what separates us is I am a liberal. the conclusion we draw from this is once again two fold:

A) These stances are not only conservative, so they ought not be attributed as such.

B) We once again cannot verify any of these statements as fact, rather just claims.

So once again we can safely see that their is not conclusive evidence to support the argument that Sniperjake1994 is a conservative

"These are characteristics of a conservative. Therefore because he believes in these he is a conservative."

I'll answer this with a quote, "Jut because it looks like a duck, quacks like a duck, and waddles like a duck, does not make it a duck.". There has never been evidence presented in this round to support the PRO's arguments so they are unable to fulfill the burden of proof, and thus we can see the resolution has been proved false.

To authenticate the arguments brought up we can look to Sniperjake1994's profile: at http://www.debate.org...

Thank you sir for accepting this,

I'm still rusty from not debating for months. So bear with me, thanks.

1. Counter evidence: I'm true to what I have on my profile. Example: I am 15/sophomore.

2. But he still leans more to the right than the middle. We both agree in 87% of the issues. And I've taken tests that show I am conservative and because we agree alot then he is also more of a conservative.
B) His ideology states: CONSERVATIVE. And I've posted a comment/question on his profile.

3. Alright! Someone believes Bush wasn't a failure. The wars are somewhat justified too.
a) Bush is a conservative and he supports Bush therefore he is a conservative.
b) Claims can be backed by facts.

Therefore Sniperjake1994 is a conservative.

Thank you sir for accepting this,

No problem I enjoy debating.

I'm still rusty from not debating for months. So bear with me, thanks.

I will.

1. Counter evidence: I'm true to what I have on my profile. Example: I am 15/sophomore.

I apologize but you are not an accurate representation of all society. People due lie, you merely say that you are 15, this could be one truth amidst thousands of lies that we don't know about and you are unwilling to shed light on. However there is absolutely no evidence to support this claim. You could be lying just to win this debate.

Seeing as this is a key area of debate I offer the following surveys to validate my logic and thus prove my side true.

[http://www.truthaboutdeception.com...]

[http://www.human-nature.com...]

In short they prove that while lying may or may not be genetically encoded it is an adaptation made to survive, and achieve goals (like winning this debate, or fitting in)

2. But he still leans more to the right than the middle. We both agree in 87% of the issues. And I've taken tests that show I am conservative and because we agree a lot then he is also more of a conservative.

Exactly he has conservative views, you never refute the claim that he could be a conservative moderate, who pledges his allegiance just to join a party and fill in a bubble. This shows that you are reiterating my position, that he is not a conservative or liberal rather something in between.

B) His ideology states: CONSERVATIVE. And I've posted a comment/question on his profile.

This question was never answered, mind you. So once again we don't have any support for the claim. But furthermore even if the question was answered we would not be able to verify it as truth. We don't know wether you too are in cahoots, conspiring to beat me, and willing to lie to do so. But even though he did put conservative as his ideology we can not tell why. There are a great variety of reasons why one might put something else as their political ideology when in actuality this is not the truth, the following are a few possibilities:

1) Right wing snipers threatening his life unless he alters his ideology and joins the conservative group

2) He could be a wayward boy, lost and along desperately trying to find someone to accept him, and under ideologies it just so happened that "Conservative" was early on in the list.

3) Someone could have hacked his account.

4) It could have been a bet, dare, or practical joke.

So as we can see just because it is on a profile does not make it true.

3. Alright! Someone believes Bush wasn't a failure. The wars are somewhat justified too.

Yes I agree with this statement but it was never argued that I am a liberal! This proves too things that conservative views make a conservative not.

a) Bush is a conservative and he supports Bush therefore he is a conservative.

As I showed with my example I agreed he was not a complete failure but does that mean I am a conservative or support him? No, it simply doesn't. The logic does not allow for a conclusion of this nature. No where does Sniperjake1994 state he supports Bush, and even if he had we couldn't ever verify the claim.

b) Claims can be backed by facts.

Which in no case were they, so you have failed to uphold the burden of proof.

Also please extend the Duck analysis which shows how all the "Logica" presented by the PRO holds no weight and is untrue.

So we ought to vote CON for the following reasons:

1. We can't verify claims

2. My opponent failed to uphold the burden of proof.
3. Duck analysis shows that even if the majority of the evidence was extended and found true, which is impossible, we still can vote CON.

Therefore Sniperjake1994 is not a conservative.

You won. And I need to find better topics.

I hope you learned your lesson, I urge you to debate on topics that are not as childish as this, but I do hope also we can have a truly fun a good debate.

Please extend my arguments.

VOTES

Conduct: Whilst not rude, a concession removes all good conduct and defaults the the person who won for two key reasons:

A) A concession implies all votes to the winner.

B) It kills debatibilty and is thus bad spirited. Also he didn't address my arguments which is essence wasted my time.

So CON

Arguments: My last speeches arguments were not attacked and quality wise I warranted mine, he failed to do so.

Once again CON

Spelling and Grammar: We can call this a tie, but according to a concession all votes ought to go to me.

CON or a Tie either will suffice.

Sources: My opponent left none I proved my arguments with valid sources.

Finally, Con.

Thank you for reading (voters) and starting this debate (opponent).