The Instigator
eatseverything
Pro (for)
Winning
7 Points
The Contender
lokuei.na
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

The downloading and possession of child pornography should not be a criminal offence

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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...
eatseverything
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/7/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 946 times Debate No: 33402
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

eatseverything

Pro

This debate has already been submitted here http://www.debate.org...

I am submitting it again because the first person to take up the debate has not made any attempts to engage.

Please feel free to respond to this debate by posting in the comments section of the other debate or by responding to everything I have already said in the debate linked above, by accepting my challenge to this debate.

If you do accept this debate, please only respond to the points made in the debate linked above.

I look forward to being challenged.
lokuei.na

Con

It should be a criminal offence because it causes under age sex and extra security of parents/gardians
Debate Round No. 1
eatseverything

Pro

I'm sorry but that just makes no sense.

It causes under age sex between who?

Please provide a source for this belief because i've certainly never heard it before.
lokuei.na

Con

lokuei.na forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
eatseverything

Pro

eatseverything forfeited this round.
lokuei.na

Con

lokuei.na forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
eatseverything

Pro

eatseverything forfeited this round.
lokuei.na

Con

lokuei.na forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
eatseverything

Pro

eatseverything forfeited this round.
lokuei.na

Con

lokuei.na forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by eatseverything 3 years ago
eatseverything
I would submit, for the reasons mentioned in my other debate, that the age of the child in question is immaterial as harm cannot be found to be caused from making and possession.
Posted by Magic8000 3 years ago
Magic8000
What defines a child? If it's someone under 18, then the resolution is harder to argue against. If a 17 year old wants to go into the business, there's no reason why it should be a criminal offense. However if child is defined as someone under say 10, one can make a reasonable argument against that.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by toolpot462 3 years ago
toolpot462
eatseverythinglokuei.naTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit