Debate Rounds (3)
Since my opponent is pro, s/he has the Burden of Proof to prove that I am mad.
Since I am con, I simply have to negate this case.
1) No, I am not mad.
2) This Resolution does not make grammatical sense, nor does it make spelling sense.
1)That joke didn't even make sense.
2) If my mom was that fat she would be pregrant with the world's largest baby and I would be the sibling of the world's largest baby, and our family would forever go down in history.
3) That yo momma jokes made me happy because it reminded me of my childhood friends in elementary school who made yo mamma jokes one of which was this: "Yo momma so fat that when she jump in da lake the whales are all like "We are family! Donna donnna" That memory launched many other memories with my childhood friends at Elementary school, increasing my happiness and decreasing my madness.
4) Continuing the happiness, during my elementary school years was a time of economic success for my family, as we had a big house and I am fond of many memories during the time period. Such as my family being united and all my extended family going to eachothers houses (including the house that I lived in) for special occasions, most notably Christmas. Those were my favorite Christmasses I ever had for the family was united and happy, and I was happy.
5) Furthering the happiness of a child, I was naive and innocent and virtually unware of the evils of this world, my childhood was a time of innocence and hapiness, and I thank you for making that yo mama joke for reminding me of those precious and happy times.
6) "Don't bring my mother into this!" -Jumba. That yo momma joke reminded me of the movie Lilo and Stich, a movie that a thoroughly enjoy. Perhaps it is because of its themes of family and friendship, things I value very much.
Thank you for making me a happier person. :-)
Since my opponent has not made me mad, but instead has made me happier, his resolution is once again negated.
trexfire forfeited this round.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by tejretics 1 year 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||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's trolling was unacceptable in the terms of conduct required in debates. Con's interpretation of trolling and their shifting of the BoP to Pro virtually invoking the Russell's Teapot gives Con arguments. Pro's spelling and grammar were poor. No sources were used in the debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate