Spongebob is a darker show than thought
Debate Rounds (4)
Mr. Crabs: greed
This is a no brainer considering that he always talks about getting money and cries when he loses a single dollar.
Patrick is a lazy starfish, in one episode he actually got a reward for being lazy, WTF
Sandy is always proud of herself, from karate to being a science genius, she also brags sometimes about how bad@ss she is. She also takes pride in where she comes from, Texas, and likes to let people know it.
You may be going "WTF, why!?" But Gary is almost always begging for food, it constantly shows spongebob feeding him, and most of his meows are for trying to get food.
Wrath is hatred, and Squidward hates his life,hates Spongebob, and is angry most of the time
Plankton is always envious of Mr. Crabs and his successful business, which drives him to try to steal the krabby patty secret formula.
One definition for lust is "excessive for others" and Spongebob certainly fits that description, he always tries to make friends with everyone he meets.
Con should at least try to disprove this, good luck to you, good sir. I hope we can be friends after this debate
Before I start, I am going to go ahead and define some terms, so at least we know what we are even debating about:
Spongebob: SpongeBob SquarePants - A show that was made in the United States by marine biologist and animator Steven Hillenburg
Dark: suggestive of or arising from evil characteristics or forces; sinister.
"darker than thought": expanding on the definition of dark, it is a widely held belief of the general public about the show SpongeBob SquarePants.
My opponent has tried to say that because the characters that are depicted within the show of Spongebob are linked to sins, that does not mean that automatically the show is darker than once previously thought. I would like to refute how "pride" and "lust" are dark personalities, first off. Not only is pride a good thing to have, as it helps a person's own self-concept grow and evolve, but having it being showcased in a Television show marked at kids is not a bad thing. Being able to be proud of ones-self is not evil, it is not sinful. In fact, it is the opposite of the definition of the word sinful, which is "wicked and immoral". Now, I would like to refute how "lust" is a sinful act, and how this is being broadcasted by the T.V. show: as my opponent has stated, the definition of the word lust is "excessive for others". Now, what the T.V. show is doing by having the protagonist care for everyone deeply is showcasing how human emotion is meant to be expressed, and how we should help posterity care for others just a little bit more. Having the definitions of "lust" and "pride" in my opponent's AFFIRMATIVE case just shows you that he does not understand what he is doing in this round, and that is why I should win.
Now, on to a few points of my very own:
The show itself is not immoral, and in fact teaches children: according to Slate , the T.V. show may have dilemnas that are not always faced for kids ("am I cool enough to get into a cool bar", for example), but it does not go verbatim for what the norm in society is, and it showcases what the real problems that are facing kids and adults alike are going through. By voting in AFFIRMATIVE on this resolution would mean that everything in the show is immoral and sinful, while it is showing the watcher that cheating on a test is not a good thing, that overloading on junk food is not okay, that stealing a car is bad, and even that dubious extra credit may lead to your own downfall.
The public itself is not scared of the show's alleged "dark morals": according to a debate here on Debate.Org , 79% of users agreed that we should not ban Spongebob from being watched. Even with YouTube videos about the dark subliminal messages that are around spongebob getting up to 2 million views , the public is still on board with it, which backs up the AFFIRMATIVE case, how? According to a Debate.Org user "There are a lot of kids that don`t get influenced by the things that happen in SpongeBob SquarePants", which further refutes his case.
[extra, never cited it but used it as background reading] http://hubpages.com...
(sorry if my case was a bit all over the place, this was my first one)
RoboRage forfeited this round.
Seeing as how to I have already refuted my opponent's case and brought up points of my own, vote CON.
RoboRage forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||6|
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.