The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
7 Points

Vote Contest

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...
Voting Style: Open Point System: Select Winner
Started: 10/29/2015 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 539 times Debate No: 81744
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)




I would like to have a voting contest with someone. Accept and then whoever gets the most votes wins. There are 2 rounds one for accepting and the other for questions.
You will have 2 weeks to win so try hard
If your voting please choose one of us you do not have to be fair whoever you like best. (maybe the name or the pic or whatever).


I negate.

The voters have to follow the standards for voting because an RFD is required on this debate (when I checked the debate parameters). This means that my opponent is advocating for voting for his side under the guise of breaking the TOS of and having your ability to vote restricted.

C1. Democracy is good.
My opponent is advocating for restricting the rights to vote of other users. Voting is something that is fundamental to a democracy; without a power in place for the people to air grievances and to say who is right and wrong, then the forum in which they talk is not democratic. This means that by affirming democracy I am negating the resolution and the advocacy of my opponent.

A. Economy

The democratisation and furthering of democracy has a net benefit on the economy. This is because consumers are able to purchase more because they feel as though they have a say within the economy.
Elias Papaioannou, Gregorios Siourounis in October 2008 says:

  • "First, compared to the pre-transition period, average growth (indicated with the purple dashed line) seems to be higher in the democratic years. Second, compared to the world average, annual per capita GDP growth in democratisation countries drops significantly during the transition; yet after the consolidation of representative rule growth fluctuates at a higher rate. It seems that as democracy consolidates, growth rates stabilise at a higher rate (compared to the non-democratic years). The graph suggests that in the short run there may be non-negligible transition costs, but in the long run growth stabilises at higher rates."

This means that there is a net benefit in the economy when there is an increase in democracy or a democracy is established, empirically. Countries with higher rGDP per capita have higher interest rates: this means that while the marginal propensity to consume is the same, there is a higher benefit for those that choose to save: an increase in cash available - people are positively effected because they are able to consume more under the same amount of income.
A lack of democratisation or a lower amount of democracy means that interest rates are low: hurting consumers for choosing to save their money. Inflation rates often outpace the interest rates, meaning that people are losing money and can consume less with the same income.

B. Democracy solves terrorism
Foot, Professor of International Relations, St. Anthony’s College, Oxford, 2003 says:
  • "gross violations of human rights generally tend to be the mark of a state that might, wittingly or not, provide the base from which terrorist cells can operate, or be hospitable to the establishment of links with transnational terrorism, or through it actions foment violent unrest that spills over its borders"
This means that by restricting democracy in this forum we are allowing for terror cells to operate within this forum. The impact of this is human lives being lost.

C. Democracy solves genocide
, Chair of the International Executive Committee of Amnesty International, Nov 2004 states:

  • "History shows that when societies trade human rights for security, most often they get neither. Instead, minorities and other marginalized groups pay the price through violation of their human rights. Sometimes this trade-off comes in the form of mass murder or genocide, other times in the form of arbitrary arrest and imprisonment, or the suppression of speech or religion. Indeed, millions of lives have been destroyed in the last sixty years when human rights norms have not been observed.' Undermining the strength of international human rights law and institutions will only facilitate such human rights violations in the future and confound efforts to bring violators to justice."

This means that we solve for genocide if we advocate for democracy within this very forum. The advocacy of the pro is to reject democracy and have voters be restricted - the advocacy is the con is for wider-spreading democracy within this forum. The impact of this is millions of lives lost.

In conclusion I have shown you that if you vote pro you are voting for: economic failure, terrorism and lives lost due to it, and genocide and lives lost to it - the numbers of lives lost in the millions.

By voting con you are advocating for widespread economic growth that is beneficial to all, saving thousands of lives from terror cells, and millions of lves to genocide.

Therefore, vote con.

Debate Round No. 1


Students Rule the School

Have you ever thought your rights were being violated? Many students have enjoyed all of their rights, but at some schools rights are being violated in terms of making school "so called better." Though some people think that rights are an unimportant factors of school rules I think that schools should factor rights into backpack and locker searches, putting metal detectors in schools, and dress codes.

My first reason for students having backpack searches is that administrators should not conduct backpack searches. Backpack searches are a violation of the Fourth Amendment. This is important because students own their backpacks not schools. Another major factor according to Dannis Hartman, a reporter for the Synonym Classroom, an online education news website states, "It takes time to perform locker searches." One more source according to Charr fron this website in his debate states, "the average ratio of students to Faculty is 1:19 That ought make search take a lot of time.

In addition to backpack searches the second reason that I believe that students need their rights is metal detectors. Although not in many schools currently, some have them. According to Brian Steele you would have to ensure there was no other way to get stuff into the school. This is important because metal detectors would be pointless if there were any other ways to get weapons into school. Another idea suggest that there would be much hassle. It would take time to get every student through the metal detector(s). most cities and school districts couldn't pay for to put a metal detector in every school, that would just be ridiculous.

I also believe that dress codes are a violation of students rights. Lets face it most students dislike there dress code. Not only would removing dress codes take away the right violation; it would create a bond between teachers and students. This would be a powerful and everlasting bond. Taking away the dress code would mean that students would think that school is the next best thing.

Some may argue that while the other side believes backpack searches metal detectors and dress codes are beneficial in schools. I however, reject those ideas because according to a survey I took most teens at my school dislike the dress code. Searching backpacks helps schools find drugs. Metal detectors are excellent ways of finding weapons. Lastly dress codes help ensure that students don't come immodest.

To sum it up, rights rule. Were your rights ever violated. Backpack and locker searches have much in common. but on the other hand dress codes are what they are. Now's the time to vote Pro. Please help me in the fight.



Pro doesn't offer a case that is topical.
Vote con because if you don't you will vote for genocide.
Debate Round No. 2
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by Redston_1 2 years ago
Posted by Lexus 2 years ago
Didn't see that coming ;)
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by logical-master123 2 years ago
Who won the debate:-Vote Checkmark
Reasons for voting decision: Con had better arguments and also debates the wrong topic.