The Instigator
JakeW
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Elysian
Con (against)
Winning
11 Points

Soldiers get less recognition for dying for there country than celebrities that die due to drugs

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 4 votes the winner is...
Elysian
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/28/2012 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,295 times Debate No: 21560
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (5)
Votes (4)

 

JakeW

Pro

There are soldiers out there everyday putting there lives on the line to save our country and help the world. Every time one of them day they get a little mention on the news but into no great detail. However with Whitney Houston and Amy Winehouse when they recently died from drug abuse they were all over the news all over the world. This isnt fair as they are getting recognition for doing a wrong and illegal thing. Surely the soldiers should get much more attention????

Any views are wanted
Elysian

Con


Hello JakeW,

I understand that this is a difficult position to take but I would like to see how far I could push the envelope.

1.0 Definitions – semantics

1.1 According to oxford dictionary online, recognition is “appreciation or acclaim for an achievement, service, or ability”

1.2 Given that celebrity do not receive officially recognition for their drug abuses, it could be argue that the gain is popularity rather recognition.

2.0 Quantity

2.1 In the case of fame, it is important to note not only the absolute amount, but the percentage increase.

2.2 Celebrities are already famous and I doubt that their death coverage would bring a substantial percentage increase in fans. Conversely, the recognition given to solders immediately brings increase awareness among the community even if they do not personally know him or her.

3.0 Quality

3.1 How many people do you think appreciate or look up to a celebrity who died from drug abuse? What they gain instead is becoming infamous. Sure a lot of people know about her death but still more took it as a lesson to avoid instead of emulating

3.2 A soldier, on the other hand, inspires people to look up to his deed and appreciate what they are doing. In terms of quantity therefore, soldiers are the ones receiving more recognition.
Debate Round No. 1
JakeW

Pro

Yes surely they become infamous and don't get more fans but they still get all over the news for doing something bad with there lives! Furthermore when you look at the news all that is said is ' Lieutenant such and such died doing this today our condolences are with his family. With celebrities on the other hand the public gets told the exact details of it all and the highlights of there life are shown every day.

Another huge problem is the pay they receive. Celebrities receive millions of pounds a year for just standing up on stage and performing for our entertainment. Soldiers are abroad in other countries trying to prevent deaths of innocent people and keep peace between groups. They are also there trying to protect our country and stop violence from reaching us and still they receive minimal pay to support themselves and also there families at home. They have to leave there families for months and months on end and don't see them and for what reward. They get next to nothing for all there efforts to keep us and every other innocent person safe!!!
Elysian

Con


Hello JakeW,

Thanks for conceding on my points (“Yes surely they become infamous and don't get more fans…”).

Currently, I feel that the debate is drifting slightly tangential to the original proposition where recognition was the key focus. Nonetheless, I will still address your concerns.

4.0 “they still get all over the news for doing something bad with there lives”

4.1 So too do thieves and murderers. Indeed, I would argue that exposure celebrities receive should be more as they were once role models for the community thus having a deeper influence than common criminals

4.2 Again, I like to remind you that being infamous does not equal to being recognized [see point 1.0]

5.0 “With celebrities on the other hand the public gets told the exact details of it”

5.1 Likewise, do we wish to divulge confidential information about our military or the soldier personal life? In the first case, national security issues would be at risk and in the second, their family lives would be jeopardized.

6.0 “Another huge problem is the pay they receive”

6.1 This is another new issue by itself, but without going into too many details, simple economics are at work. In general, this means that the amount they receive is what we as a community are willing to pay them. Thus, we “voted” for their wages with our purchase of their records, movies...etc.

7.0 Moving back to the topic, I rest my case that soldiers get more recognition for dying than celebrities who die due to drugs abuses.
Debate Round No. 2
JakeW

Pro

The point I am trying to get across though is the publicity soldiers get in comparison to celebrities. The recognition the soldiers receive is not as much as they deserve. Years ago soldiers were seen as courageous heroes that the country were proud of and the soldiers themselves held it a great honour to serve there country.

Now however there has been many occasions on which soldiers have been called foolish for risking there lives. Also there are certain ridiculous events where the soldiers have been charged under the human rights act for misconduct in war and causing supposed harm when protecting themselves. Also they as soldiers are stereotyped to be idiots and unintelligent beings because they cant get into any other job and have resorted to the army as a last resort. Actually however some may of done it as a way to honour a brother/father that died and to follow in there footsteps as there family showed great respect to them for there will to fight.
Elysian

Con

Hello JakeW,

That is a new and interesting point you brought out.


8.0 recognition the soldiers receive is not as much as they deserve.

8.1 First, our original premise is comparing soldiers to celebrities who die form drug abuse. This instead turns it around by comparing past to present.

8.2 How do we determine how much they should deserve? Let’s say if we would to print headlines of soldiers who lost their life, who is it to say we should not start building monuments with their names engraves there (because, why not? Human life is priceless after all)

8.3 You assess that there are more people now who look at the profession of being a solider with disdain. This might be a cultural thing as Korean still highly value their soldiers and are given better job prospects and wages after their military service.

All in all, these are some very good points but perhaps not so relevant in this current debate.

Debate Round No. 3
JakeW

Pro

In response to your quote about the Korean military service it is only one country named that provides care after there military service. In the UK soldiers leave the military and are just forgotten about and some may have various war related problems i.e post traumatic stress disorder. Also people who have suffered the loss of a limb during fighting aren't provided with as much care as they should be.
Elysian

Con

Hello JakeW,
I feel that the debate has strayed too far out of the pre-defined scope. perhaps, I was partly to blame as I tried to counter your arguments. so, I am just going to explain why it is out of point without any counter.

9.0 "provides care after there military service"
9.1 Our argument compare recognition for celebrities who dies due to drug abuse to solider who dies in their line of service.
At no point was care a factor in the debate.

9.2 no comparison of celebrities was found in your argument.

btw, "there" refers to location. "their" refers to belonging

Debate Round No. 4
JakeW

Pro

The debate isn't straying it is just more points that have arisen and come to my attention. So to compare it to celebrities look at all the care and attention they receive when they get an illness. I am sure people would come in hoards to offer their 'get well soons' and also if a celebrity died everyone shows there respect and lay flowers outside the family home. What recognition for soldiers is there when they die apart from that from close family and they have provided much more to the country.
Elysian

Con

Hello JakeW,
10.0 I think I see your point, and I do not dispute that the number of people who shows up are quite a fair bit. However, I would like to refer you back to point [2.0] where I argued that the percentage increase form that is lower than what soldier get.

10.1 Furthermore, when soldiers gives their lives for the country, not only the family but the community get together to pay homage to them. These could be the members from churches, clubs, squadron and online profile where friend of friends get to recognize them.

10.2 I hope that if I failed to convince you, I would have at least made you think deeper about this issue. Again, Thanks for opening with this debate and best of luck for the vote :)
Debate Round No. 5
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by Ron-Paul 5 years ago
Ron-Paul
I guess someone did.
Posted by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
5 rounds? Pass
Posted by Ron-Paul 5 years ago
Ron-Paul
I agree with Dave_82. Will anyone take this?
Posted by Dave_82 5 years ago
Dave_82
I like the idea, and I applaudd you for it, but do you really think anyone will take it? Your point seems more established fact than a debatable topic.
Posted by Double_R 5 years ago
Double_R
This sounds more like a vent session then a debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
JakeWElysianTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: This got really far away from the topic, but I think that we can still see the clear winner was Con. Pro kept brining up new points without trying to respond to con's rebuttals and arguments. Pro kept taking the debate farther and farther away from the resolution, forcing Con to do the same to be able to respond to pro's arguments. Not all Pro's fault for this, but a good portion of the blame can go there. But again, obvious win for con is obvious.
Vote Placed by imabench 5 years ago
imabench
JakeWElysianTied
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: im surprised the con didnt mention how the sheer number of soldiers deaths may have an impact on news coverage of their deaths, but the con still gave enough points to win the debate as the pro spent all of this debate backtracking and trying to fight the con rather than use his own arguments. Job well done
Vote Placed by Yep 5 years ago
Yep
JakeWElysianTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Elysian i liked your format, however con was sub par with pro the entire time, refuting a few but not all arguments. In the end though, i saw past this and looked towards cons argumentation of the community, Pro brought up non-topical arguments, con made the mistake of addressing these, however con still refuted the most arguments in the end. Therefore it is a con decision.
Vote Placed by Greyparrot 5 years ago
Greyparrot
JakeWElysianTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: great debate.