The Instigator
cwarwick19
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
DebaterGood
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

The legal definition of genocide

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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/14/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 10 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 384 times Debate No: 89702
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (0)

 

cwarwick19

Con

According to the U.N., the definition of genocide is this: Genocide means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group as such:
1. Killing members of the group
2. Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group
3. Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part
4. Imposing measures intended to prevent births within the group
5. Forcibly transferring children of the group to another group

This would mean that the killing of around 10,000 homosexuals during the Holocaust would not be considered genocide due to the fact that they are not a "national, ethnical, racial, or religious group. Or the killing of 200,000 disabled individuals during the same period of time. This definition of genocide is missing specific groups of people and I believe that it is flawed.
DebaterGood

Pro

First, good luck to my opponent. Secondly, if I am correct, we are arguing if the definition of genocide is correct, which was unclear by the title. There was not enough information given by my opponent as to who the disabled/homosexual people belonged too. There was no indication of what groups that these people could have belonged too. For all the information given by the opponent, the disabled and homosexual population that was killed could have been from national, ethnic, racial , or religious minority. Is it possible that these people were of the many mercilessly killed Jews during the holocaust. This is why I believe that the contention raised by my opponent is too vague and unless later explained, shouldn't take any other place in this argument. Since there have been no arguments besides this, I believe that I have won this round.
Debate Round No. 1
cwarwick19

Con

cwarwick19 forfeited this round.
DebaterGood

Pro

Since my opponent has forfeited this round, I will close my argument saying that I have clearly won this debate, saying that the legal definition of genocide is correct and shouldn't be changed. The burden of proof was on my opponent, and he/she has provided no solid evidence as to how his/her arguments were valid.
Debate Round No. 2
cwarwick19

Con

cwarwick19 forfeited this round.
DebaterGood

Pro

Since my opponent has basically forfeited the debate, I will simply say that the legal definition based on the arguments raised in this debate should remain the same, and I have clearly won this debate.
I rest my case.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by DebaterGood 10 months ago
DebaterGood
What? Since you posted the LEGAL definition of genocide, what is there to debate?
No votes have been placed for this debate.