You don't have to take care of an elderly or sick family member if they abused you as a child.
Debate Rounds (3)
My Argument: No Tommy dose not. There are other family members who have no problem with the man they can take him or send him to a nursing home or something. Tommy moved away with plans to never see the bastard again, and he should keep those plans.
But to refute your argument before hand....
It is moral duty to help Tommies father. Even though he got abused but it must have been for a reason. Not only Tommies father have other relatives then why did he call Tommy first? Well Tommies father loves him like any other father and his father gave brith to him and thats what counts..
Maybe Tommy's father dose love him when he is not drunk. Maybe if he doesn't have other family members Tommy and can out the old man in a nursing home. But the old man wouldn't deserve any of that. And what if Tommy has kids now? Would yo feel it's safe to have an alcoholic child beater around your children? I wouldn't. In fact that's why I never met my grandpa. My mother new is wasn't safe to have such a man around children.
Contention 1: Even if you have been abused, Tommies father gave him life which is much more important than anything.
Well first off, Life is rare. You can't give life randomly. Tommies father gave Tommy already an important thing which is life. Even is Toomies father beat him up because he was drunk is not his fault. Parent have love for they children. Seriously, parents care. And so on, Tommies father called Tommy for help first which means that Tommy is something to him. You even admited that Tommy's father does love him when he is not drunk. So that means that Tommy's father does love Tommy and not only that Tommy should already know that Tommy's father is drunk and can't stop but its not his fault. Tommy would have already gotten used to that. But Tommy now could stop his father's addiction if he could just help and help Tommy's father our to stop this addiction and become a good man. Later on Tommy's father would thank him and be sorry for hitting him in the past.
Contention 2: People can change.
Tommy could help his father and change him into a not alcoholic guy. He could help his father and grate him well and later on, Tommy's father could change and help Tommy's children. As the site say that people could change and that is what Tommy should do..
These are the reasons why you should got for me thank you.
And I said maybe Tommy's father loved him. We don't know for sure, I know my grandfather didn't love my mother but that is a personal story I'm not my mother would want me to share.
And who's fault was it then that Tommy was beaten? And what if there was another kind of abuse as well? What if the disgusting pig molested and raped Tommy? That dose happen you know. Someone who dose that to children shouldn't be allowed around them AT ALL.
And as for people changing, well they can but Tommy can't make him change, and if his father hasn't changed already then who knows what he will do if Tommy tried to change him.
In the end it is Tommy's choice. If Tommy doesn't want to ever see this man again then he has the right to shut the door in is face.
My opponents first argument is saying that Maybe Tommy's father loved him. Well first off he agrees that Tommy's father ives him so my point is still standing also He also gives example of his personal life but as my argument still stands, people can change and Tommy can bring his father to change.
Also, My opponent also said that What if the disgusting pig molested and raped Tommy? That dose happen you know. Someone who dose that to children shouldn't be allowed around them AT ALL.
Well first off this this i agree shouldn't be allowed by still my argument goes against that still saying that if Tommy can bring and change him and teach him like a father then, he can change. I said that people can change. So that point is still standing.
My opponent also said that Tomm'y can't make him change but as i gave you many sites on how it can here is an example.
These sites say that people can change their past.
To finalize, my argument that people can change is still standing and my opponent's argument fail to stand. This is why you should vote for me thank you.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by orangemayhem 2 years 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:||3||2|
Reasons for voting decision: No obvious Conduct violations, S/G equal, Con was the only side to use sources. I felt that the crux of this debate came down to what was owed from the abused to the abuser, and I rather felt that Proposition had the superior argument on that one. Proposition made a much more concerted - and in my opinion successful - effort to attack points issued by Opposition, particularly on the ideas of the giving of life necessitating love, although Opposition did make a good case for the potential for help to bring about change. All in all, a decent debate.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.