The Instigator
DongJuan21
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Con (against)
Winning
21 Points

We should stop whaling

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 5 votes the winner is...
ResponsiblyIrresponsible
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/8/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 609 times Debate No: 77423
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (5)

 

DongJuan21

Pro

Imagine being in Japan at the ocean on a beautiful spring day. You see all the wonderful creatures popping up from the water. Suddenly, you hear horrible cries of a harmless whale, being slaughtered and exploited by whale hunters. Take a moment and think about what that whale may be feeling. Think about why the hunters are harming it. This is called whaling, where the whales are hunted, speared, shot, and killed for their meat.

The hunters use the whale for a lot of products that you may unknowingly use today! Did you also know that you might even eat it everyday? Why should we care? Whaling is poisonous to the people who eat it, it"s inhumane to poison us and kill mammals. Also, it"s a waste of money. Therefore, we should put an end to whaling.

First, whaling is highly poisonous to the people who may eat the whale meat. The factory workers in Japan say that whales are really healthy to eat, but that"s not necessarily true. Whale meat is heavily contained with mercury. Mercury is so toxic that only one small drop of it, can poison an entire pod of whales. Just by eating one bite, of the whale meat, it"s possible that you may not live after that! Also, the people who might eat the whale meat may not know that it contains mercury. If an expectant woman were to eat the whale meat, her baby may result in having retardation or a deformity. So, therefore the whale meat is not so healthy to eat.

Next, whaling is also inhumane to poison us and kill mammals. The whale hunters believe that whaling is not inhumane because the whales tend to die fast. So, they hunt whales and use them for resources because they think it"s the right thing to do; since the whales are going to die soon anyway. The whales are like us, humans. They"re harmless and they"re the second most intelligent animals. Whales are vulnerable to pain and suffering, which means, they are easily hurt. When the hunters shoot their riffles at a whale, it"s aware and can feel every bit of pain. Also, whale hunters believe that whales should be treated in the same way as other animals, such as chickens, cows, and pigs. Whales should not be treated like other animals because they are social beings. Over twenty-three, thousand of them are killed each year anyway.

Lastly, whaling is a waste of money. Japan sells the whale meat at high rates. They also mark the meat purposely, wrong so that the customers won"t know that it"s actually a whale that they"re eating. Japan also use whales for soap, tobacco, dog food, and other supplies. They say that they use whales for research, but stabbing and killing them, doesn"t sound like any research to me! Also, instead of using the money, given to them, for the poor, they use it for whaling. They use the whales to get them a better success in finance.

In conclusion, whaling is highly effective. Therefore, it needs to be stopped. Think about the poison that"s harming the ones who eat the whale meat. Think about the people who don"t know what they"re eating. Most importantly, think about the harmless whales. So, stand up and fight to put an end to whaling!
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

I accept.

Note that PRO has plagiarized the entirety of his first round. His round was copy and pasted in its entirety from a teen essay from this website [http://www.teenink.com...] without the slightest attribution. This is a clear sign of plagiarism, and for this I urge our voters to award me conduct.

From there, I will give PRO a chance to, if he so chooses, present real arguments in the following round. But obviously you should throw out the entirety of his Round 1 because it was plagiarized.
Debate Round No. 1
DongJuan21

Pro

Ok I admit but this whole thing is wht I was trying to tell you Thanks
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

PRO has plagiarized. Extend.
Debate Round No. 2
DongJuan21

Pro

What are you talking about I have more argument please listen to me.
ResponsiblyIrresponsible

Con

PRO hasn't made a single argument; the only thing he has even offered is an article from teenlink that was plagiarized -- but that he's passing off as his own argument -- in its entirety. He hasn't in any way advanced his burden of proof, and that he, in the face of his plagiarim, is insisting that his unattrbuted copy/paste job could substitute for his own argument is nothing more than a conduct violation.

Therefore, vote CON. Plagiarism is inexcusable.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
5 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
DongJuan21ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagerism= auto loss.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 2 years ago
Midnight1131
DongJuan21ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: Plagiarism by Pro
Vote Placed by tejretics 2 years ago
tejretics
DongJuan21ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:02 
Reasons for voting decision: Sources. Pro plagiarized the entirety of their argument from a source shown by Con, and failed to credit the source or put quotes. As such, this is misuse of sources, and I award sources to Con. Arguments. While Pro was the only one to make an argument, it was plagiarized, so I tie this point. S&G. Tie. While there were some errors in punctuation by Pro, lack of punctuation didn't go so far as to make the argument incomprehensible, so I tie this point. Conduct. I tie conduct, since both sides maintained acceptable conduct -- I don't consider plagiarism misconduct so much as misuse of sources. Ergo, I vote Con.
Vote Placed by Death23 2 years ago
Death23
DongJuan21ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Re: Conduct Pro plagiarized Re: S&G Pro's plagiarized statements are not considered. Only Pro's actual content is considered. Pro made only two statements: "Ok I admit but this whole thing is wht I was trying to tell you Thanks" "What are you talking about I have more argument please listen to me." These statements are full of spelling and grammar errors. These errors are so bad, particularly in the second statement, that Pro is nearly incoherent. Con's writings have some minor S&G problems, but these do not rise to the level of Pro's S&G errors. Re: Convincing The BoP is on Pro since he brought the claim. To win, Pro must argue that the resolution is true without any convincing refutation by Con. Pro's plagiarized arguments will not be considered. Absent Pro's plagiarized arguments, Pro makes no argument in support of the resolution. Therefore, Pro fails to meet his BoP, and Con wins by default. Re: Sources Pro used no source. Con linked Pro's plagiarized ar
Vote Placed by SeventhProfessor 2 years ago
SeventhProfessor
DongJuan21ResponsiblyIrresponsibleTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: plagiarism and concession (kinda?)