The Instigator
Max.Wallace
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
lannan13
Con (against)
Winning
6 Points

This is not about nationalism, it is about FREEDOM!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!1111

Do you like this debate?NoYes-3
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 2 votes the winner is...
lannan13
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/31/2014 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 853 times Debate No: 59808
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (12)
Votes (2)

 

Max.Wallace

Pro

well say what you mean, truthfully if you oppose, and if your profile is a fib then so be you!
lannan13

Con

I accept this debate and will be arguing that it is about nationalism and that freedom needs to be limited to an extent.
Debate Round No. 1
Max.Wallace

Pro

They are the same thing in this nation. A nation of law that does not respect it's own laws can never be considered a free nation. Thanks for the courage, dude.
lannan13

Con

Contention 1: Total Freedom Means Anarchy

Some freedoms have to be restricted. If we had total Freedom it would be an anarchy and our civilization would be gone. Sigmund Freud has stated that humans are selfishly aggressive.

"I have found little that is 'good' about human beings on the whole. In my experience most of them are trash, no matter whether they publicly subscribe to this or that ethical doctrine or to none at all. That is something that you cannot say aloud, or perhaps even think."

Thomas Hobbes has also shown that humanity, by nature, is rotten. That we will rape and pillage everything unless we have a threat. This of course being laws and punishment. Otherwise we would end up in chaos and anarchy. ( http://www.iep.utm.edu...) You see humans are violent by nature so if we do not have law and order then we will all kill each other and rape and pillage everything.

Sometimes freedoms need to be compramised. Much like the Patriot Act and the new Airport Security Messures. The fact is that it is a dangerious world that we live in and we need to protect those who are innocent.

Contention 2: Nationalism is important.

Your nationalism is your identity of who you are. I'm part Irish and fiercely proud of it. I'm also an American and just like the song goes, "I'm Proud to be an American." America is known as the melting pot nation (and jokingly called the salad bowl nation as well), because we have many different cultures and nationalities here. Take me for example, I'm predominately Irish, but I'm also Welch, Scottish, English, German, and Swiss. Do these nationalities affect my decission makings? Possibly. In World War 1 President Wilson had to be very careful about who he declared war on as many Americans were German. He declared war against the German Kaiser, not Germany. This was in order not to upset the many Germans living in the US. There was also a vote in 1795 to make German the official language in the US. It was defeated by one mere vote. Can you imagain how different the world history would have been if that bill had passed.
Debate Round No. 2
Max.Wallace

Pro

Thanks for your patience sir. I will retort honestly, as that is my manner. I had a root canal today, no painkillers accepted by me although the prescription was ready ahead of time, I like life, and it is a pain by nature. So be it.

I agree that "no law", or anarchy as another term, is a horrible idea. We, humans, as a race or species have not evolved far enough for that. We still have a large amount of just plain killers, at all levels of society, mostly at the top, but thoroghly distributed through all ranks.

To further define this-They are the same thing in this nation. A nation of law that does not respect it's own laws can never be considered a free nation. My quote means that when we let people jump our borders illegally, and with no punishment for breaking the law, at the blessing of the regime, how is anyone free here? there are so many laws, I bet almost everyone that lives free breaks some every day. We are all criminals, mostly, except maybe nuns. Speed limits? whats that? No food scraps allowed in the trash? huh?

I welcome your debate and wish I had the fortitude to continue, however it is difficult to have a dispute with someone you admire. Carry on soldier, I respect you. Thanks.
lannan13

Con

You're most definately welcome. For some reason my bolding does not want to work so I will not be able to use it this round so I apologize ahead of time.

Contention 1: More Freedom is Anarchy

My opponent has conceded here so I extend my argument across the board.

Contention 2: Nationalism is identity.

My opponent's argument here about a nation that doesn't fallow their own laws isn't free makes no sense. If that statement is correct then no nation in this world is free and freedom is a myth. There will always be people in this world who do not fallow the law. So if my opponent's statement is also true then that means there is no freedom and that means via default that Nationalism is more important than freedom, because there is no freedom. Also my opponent has dropped my nationalism is your identity. So I extend that argument across the board as well.

With that I thank you and please vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Max.Wallace 3 years ago
Max.Wallace
It may take me the time limit to respond, sir. Thanks for your patience, we are not debating for presidentship, so just hold the boat.
Posted by Max.Wallace 3 years ago
Max.Wallace
Pauseandthink, I thought you were a quitter, congrats on your fortitude. An international forum, ye hah! How American is that?
Posted by PauseAndThink 3 years ago
PauseAndThink
Again, Mr Max Wallace parades himself about international forums without the slightest idea of what he has to say.
Posted by Bullish 3 years ago
Bullish
I'm tempted to snipe him because I don't want to be stuck at 13 wins.
Posted by NathanDuclos 3 years ago
NathanDuclos
Again. what is your point or premise that your are for?
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
YYW i've seen worst. This dude at my school argued that school uniforms should not be banned because they looked cool.
Posted by YYW 3 years ago
YYW
Max you are pretty much the worst debater I have ever seen. Even more so than dairygirl4u2c
Posted by NathanDuclos 3 years ago
NathanDuclos
Yes. . . I am intrigued by the humorous view of libertarians and presumed superiority.
Posted by Chimera 3 years ago
Chimera
What exactly is the argument for this debate?
Posted by Kc1999 3 years ago
Kc1999
"Does one truly have freedom when your nation is not strong?"
"What is freedom but a delusion?"
"What is your nation but your blood, soul, and brothers?"
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by distraff 3 years ago
distraff
Max.Wallacelannan13Tied
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 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: Con had stronger arguments about how you cannot have unlimited freedom and national identity is important. Pro talked about how we cannot break our own laws but I don't see how this really refuted Con. Arguments go to Con.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 3 years ago
bladerunner060
Max.Wallacelannan13Tied
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: Pro's case was never really coherent, and Con pointed out that Pro's responses were either nonexistent, or invalidated the very subject Pro was supporting. Arguments to Con. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.