The Instigator
OobsTheWise
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
TinyBudha
Con (against)
Winning
4 Points

Steps taken towards Equality of Race/ Religion/ Gender are infact segrating us further.

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 1 vote the winner is...
TinyBudha
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/23/2015 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 558 times Debate No: 78032
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (1)

 

OobsTheWise

Pro

I have come to understand that in the U.S. Equality for the most part has been achieved for quite some time. However it stands to reason that the methods put in place to level the playing field so to speak, or support minority groups did not help equality but rather simply drove a wedge between the people. I implore you to try to look at these issues from an outside perspective rather then the media induced brainwashed minds we have all been programmed to have.
TinyBudha

Con

The opponent takes burden of proof in this match. I ask no arguments be made in the last round. Please state your opening arguments.
Debate Round No. 1
OobsTheWise

Pro

I would like to open by stating that true equality does not take sides, by definition equality can have no handicaps. Since there are many factors to this argument i will focus on just a few.

I might as well start with the elephant in the room. The issue of white privilege and African American suppression has been the most highly debated topic in recent years. Due to historical circumstances in the U.S. Ideas and methods have been put into place to serve as a equalizer for the minority. Every year we have black history month which serves as a time of reflection for the achievements of African Americans. It is my wholehearted opinion that the history of an ethnic group should not be isolated to a specific month, it is both demeaning and the exact opposite of equality, nor should ethnic groups be granted scholarships based on skin color, and it would stand to reason that media should not publish content exclusively for a specific ethnic group. The examples aforementioned are prime examples of racism by the dictionary definition "a belief or doctrine that inherent differences among the various human racial groups determine cultural or individual achievement". True equality would be to acknowledge a U.S. citizen as an American and treat them as such.

A Growing issue is gender equality, feminism is on the rise of and of course the issues of sexual identification. These issues have more factors then the racial issues. One of the biggest issues that stands out to me in this day and age is the undeniable fact that despite job applications specifically stating "we are an equal opportunity employer we do not discriminate between race, religion, or sex" due to the equal opportunity act of 1974, they still discriminate. By definition discrimination is " the treatment or consideration of, or making a distinction in favor of or against, a person or thing based on the group, class, or category to which that person or thing belongs rather than on individual merit". The Affirmative action plan was set in to place after the signing of the Executive Order 10925 of 1961, that specifically granting special consideration to racial minorities and women who have been historically excluded groups in America. By means is this equal, in fact some countries have done away with affirmative action due to the unequal nature of the plan. Say a Hospital has 90% male employees and they are hiring a neurosurgeon, one candidate is a male with slightly higher test scores then the opposing female candidate. By hiring the female candidate because of the aforementioned factors you are depriving patients from the care they deserve, because the employment decision was made with bias.

Freedom of religion was a huge selling point for what made this country so great, but slowly political correctness has overwhelmed the ability to practice religion in government funded facility such as schools. The governments goal being to neutralize religious differences in order to create equality. However this simply promotes atheism, not being allowed to pray in school violates your constitutional right, it violates your equality to practice the religion of your choice. With the recent passing of marriage equality it has become a requirement to marry any couple regardless of sexual preference, denying this is considered unconstitutional. In recent events a pastor from Ohio is being sued for not agreeing to marry a same sex couple. This again violates his rights, and creates more inequality.

in closing to this argument i would like to say, while it is nearly inconceivable to create a government system that is flawless, we are taking huge steps in the wrong direction.
TinyBudha

Con

What PRO has to Prove

Pro has accepted the BOP. The resolution is: "Steps taken towards Equality of Race/ Religion/ Gender are infact segrating us further." In order for the resolution to be affirmed, pro must show that nearly every step that America has previously made which attempted to improve racial, genderal, and religious equality, are currently segregating us further.[1] This is proved by my source 1.

PRO hasn't even come close to fulfilling BOP

Pro has argued only a few things and has used litterally no evidence to back up his claims. There is a famous saying which states "That which has been asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence". And thus, we can clearly reject the entirety of the last speach as litterally all of it was based on personal opinion and fact-asserting. For instance my opponent has asserted that black history month, ethnically based scholarships, affirmative action, political correctness, lack of prayer in schools, and forcing preasts to marry homosexuals, is a result of indoctrination, is demeaning, promotes atheism, is discrimination, is biased and violates rights; all of this was stated without proof and without warrant or reason. In one instance my opponent even states "It is my wholehearted opinion..." In any case the facts are clear, we have been presented with far to much ocnjecture and not enough cold hard facts. The only argumentation that pro gives us is twice through arguing that certain things are rascist by definition, yet even if these one or two instances, such as affirmative action, can-be/are actually rascist, and promote inequality, this certainly doesn't prove that *nearly all* steps taken by the USA to achieve equality of race, gender, and religion are doing just the opposite. What PRO should have provided is something which inherently underlies all instances of attempting to increase equality. But instead we have recieved conjecture, opinions, and only a few "steps" which are possibly resulting in further inequality. PRO hasn't even told us how many steps have been taken...you should assume an almost infinite amount until specified for fairness, as he holds BOP.

Furthermore there should be no new arguments accepted in the last speach. The last speach is meant for recap and why a person wins. If the opponent argues next round he will have no way to respond to my refutation which is unfair.


You Vot3 CON because of A, B, and C

a.) PRO takes the full burden to prove.

b.) PRO must argue that ALMOST ALL steps taken by the USA to achieve equality do just the opposite, however he has failed to do this, we have only recieved a few scattered examples, most are based on conjecture, the rest are only a few examples. Thus reject the first speach as insufficient.

c.) PRO should have shown and must show something Inherent about decisions which try to increase equality in the US that result in increased inequality. PRO has not done this and thus cannot win until he does. However there shouldn't be any new arguments made in the last rounds.


Citations

[1]http://tinyurl.com...

Debate Round No. 2
OobsTheWise

Pro

My purpose for participating in this debate was to see another viewpoint on this subject matter, i gave facts on both gender and racism, though the religious subject was a bit lacking, i will admit. You gave absolutely no information regarding the subject, if you win it is no dirt off my shoulders, as you use technicalities to win over any knowledge of the subject. You should be a lawyer not a debater. My purpose was to open societies eyes to our own self destruction because i genuinely care, you on the other hand have no passion you are simply in it to win it, and for the record i don't care if writing this isn't proper debate format. It is useless to argue my point now as you have completely derailed from the subject, i would like to thank you for wasting my time debating with someone who doesn't even care. No hard feelings
TinyBudha

Con

Although this round hasn't turned out how I had hoped I do want PRO to know that I didn't mean to be cheap, these are my honest opinions of the round...

In recap of what has happened so far, I extend all of the following arguments because the opponent has dropped them...

a.) PRO takes the full burden to prove.

b.) PRO must argue that ALMOST ALL steps taken by the USA to achieve equality do just the opposite, however he has failed to do this, we have only recieved a few scattered examples, most are based on conjecture, the rest are only a few examples. Thus reject the first speach as insufficient.

c.) PRO should have shown and must show something Inherent about decisions which try to increase equality in the US that result in increased inequality. PRO has not done this and thus cannot win until he does. However there shouldn't be any new arguments made in the last rounds.


So this round goes pretty simply, My opponent has not disagreed with me that she must prove that almost all steps taken by the USA to promote equality do just the opposite, in order to win he must prove that this is true, thus the BOP he has accepted goes unfulfilled. I will once again go over my arguments but keep in mind that this is all which is neccesary to win...






One

Pro has to prove that MOST "steps" taken to decrease inequality in the US, by the US, do the opposite, and segregate us. This is supported by my source from the "English Language and Usage Stack Exchange" Which is a website of people who specialize in answering grammatical questions. Even in context they agree on this interpritation.



Two

Without evidence or reasoning we can disregard that which was asserted without evidence or reasoning. If you look at PRO's arguments you will neither see a source, nor a warrant for any of the claims made aside from two definitions, however, even if I conceded these arguments the BOP would not be fulfilled becuase this would only prove that one or two instances of equality "steps" did the opposite, not that almost all steps have the opposite effect. Once again, PRO should have shown something inherent about these policies (aka "steps") which almost always results in a segregational effect. This has not been proven in the least bit.




A response to my opponent

It is not, and has never been, my perogotive to be 'lawyery' about this subject. However I agreed to this debate's resoution which means you're arguments should also reflect that resolution. I have only stated the truth in anything I have said. The arguments presented seem more like talking points than real arguments....I feel as though this would be better on a forum, instead of as a debate round...I would be happt to redo this match if you re-vamp your arguments...



Thank you...





Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Hayd 2 years ago
Hayd
As the BoP was not specified in R1, Con makes the claim that the BoP is on Pro. Technically Pro has jurisdiction and could deny this claim, but since this goes uncontested by Pro, it is affirmed that Pro has BoP. Pro"s opening arguments are weak as they hold not evidence to support them as Con correctly points out in R2. As BoP was on Pro, Con did not have to prevent any arguments of his own, merely negate Pro"s. Pro fails to fulfill their BoP as to; lack of evidence, inability to show that every equal rights movement in America has done the exact opposite of its intentions (only cites the most common not all of the equal rights movements.) Although this is an unfair task, and if Pro would have appealed to Con as so I am sure Con would have conceded this and this point would have been negated. Yet Pro basically concedes R3 sadly which leaves the point valid, therefore I awarded Con conduct points. Overrall the debate should have gone a lot better, but due to Pro"s lack of debating experience; Con beat him out in technicalities. If Pro would have been debating for as long a Con, and not new to the subject, I expect this debate would have been very interesting. Sadly this is not the case and Con wins.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Hayd 2 years ago
Hayd
OobsTheWiseTinyBudhaTied
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 Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments.