The Instigator
anonymouse
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Stonewall
Con (against)
Winning
33 Points

Zimmerman does not seem like a good guy

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 7 votes the winner is...
Stonewall
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/14/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 850 times Debate No: 37706
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (5)
Votes (7)

 

anonymouse

Pro

His cousin accused him of rape. He was recently arrested for attacking his wife. He killed Trayvon Martin. His daddy is a judge. He is concealing his Jewish roots. He has a history of violence. He has a police record.
Stonewall

Con

His cousin accused him of rape. [1]

First, there have been many cases of people being falsely accused of rape. Second, those charges were only made after the Martin case went public. Throwing in another accusation on top of this could just be a way of kicking Zimmerman (whom she could have had a grudge with) while he's down.

He was recently arrested for attacking his wife. [2]

"[Zimmerman] 'accosted' her father and 'punched' him in the nose, leaving a 'mark' on his face. But fire officials who responded to the scene 'checked everyone physically' and found that 'no one had any visible marks or needed any treatment,' according to Hudson."

Obviously, this has no real evidence. Later on in the article, it's mentioned that Zimmerman's ex-wife has a history of lying to the point of being charged over it.

He killed Trayvon Martin.

We could have a debate on this alone. He acted in self-defense, both parties acted poorly, and Zimmerman was found not guilty. End of story. If you would like to continue this conversation, I'd be happy to.

His daddy is a judge. He is concealing his Jewish roots.

And this pertains to Zimmerman being a bad person how?

He has a history of violence. He has a police record. [3]

Zimmerman was charged with "resisting officer with violence," and the charges were then reduced, and then waived completely. Zimmerman and his ex-fiancee filed restraining orders against each other due to domestic abuse, and both were granted. Oh, and Zimmerman was caught speeding. Now, obviously Zimmerman's record isn't clean, but it's nothing unheard of. My mother-in-law has a restraining order against her for attacking her ex's mistress. But she couldn't be a nicer person. And since the first charge was waived completely, it's hard to take it seriously in the first place- if Zimmerman had any truly bad record, those charges would never have been lowered, let alone dropped completely.


And let's not forget that Zimmerman helped save a family of four from an overturned vehicle. Now, he could have kept driving, and no one would be any the wiser. But he did stop and saved a family- two kids included. Meanwhile, he and his family and anyone even remotely connected with him are receiving death threats. The American people seem to think that violence begets violence, even though Zimmerman's doing his best to continue life and live down his past. [4] I'd never say that Zimmerman's perfect, or a hero among men. Life happens, bad things happen. But Zimmerman is clearly doing his best to turn his life around, and I think that speaks volumes about his character.

Sources:
[1] http://www.mstarz.com...
[2] http://usnews.nbcnews.com...
[3] http://www.allvoices.com...
[4]http://www.foxnews.com...

Debate Round No. 1
anonymouse

Pro

Well you know, in order to be a judge in the U.S., you have to be corrupt. You simply can't be a judge in America if you're an overall good guy. How many good judges does any of us know? Shill excluded. Anyone who isn't brain washed knows the U.S. regime is corrupt from top to bottom, therefore, the fact that his father holds some power within the regime points to the fact that he comes from a corrupt family.

As far as him concealing his Jewish roots. Why conceal it? Does he have something to hide? If you're Jewish, then just admit it.
Stonewall

Con

I would like to point out that Pro refuted absolutely none of my points, save for the judge and Jewish ones.

**"...in order to be a judge in the U.S., you have to be corrupt."

And for once, I thought I was going to have a serious debate. My point here speaks for itself. This statement is flawed to the point of complete silliness. Okay, whatever, let's just assume (hypothetically, of course) that your quote is correct. Like, it's actually a requirement that judges must be corrupt. This still has nothing to do with the fact that Zimmerman comes from a corrupt family- it's not like corruptness is genetic or even taught. How many people come from bad families and turn out to be good themselves?

**"If you're jewish, then just admit it."

Unlike my last point, I can't even pretend like this has anything to do with his 'badness.'

This debate is wasting my time. If you have no valid points, I'll forfeit the next round without concern for winning or losing. Even if you're trolling, at least make an attempt. This half-assery is childish.
Debate Round No. 2
anonymouse

Pro

Still. Good guys don't usually have judges for daddys, carry a gun with them, get accused of attacking their wife, conceal their Jewishness, get accused of paedophilia, and kill boys. You can defend yourself without killing someone.
Stonewall

Con

Key phrase being, "usually". I refer to my former point that bad things happen to good people. You say "kill boys" like Trayvon was nine or something. Zimmerman obviously was attacked judging by the wounds on his head.I refuted all other points.

Well, what a le epic debate bro! U sure trololo'd me! At least, I *hope* this is just some half-hearted troll (if so, you could have done a lot better). If not, thanks for the useless debate.

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by tswizzle36 3 years ago
tswizzle36
so much sass
i love it
you're my idol
Posted by Stonewall 4 years ago
Stonewall
Well, thanks everyone. Wish I had known this stuff sooner. What a shame. I keep getting into these half-assed debates.
Posted by StarTrek 4 years ago
StarTrek
It is very clear that anonymouse has no idea what the hech she is saying. I resend my last comment since she is actually Jewish.
Posted by StarTrek 4 years ago
StarTrek
Why does it matter if he has Jewish roots? Prejudice much?
Posted by Jebediah-Kerman 4 years ago
Jebediah-Kerman
By the way Stonewall, check out anonymouse's other arguments. They prove to be informative on the way this debate will go...
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by donald.keller 3 years ago
donald.keller
anonymouseStonewallTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I cried so much during this....
Vote Placed by gabbsmcswaggin 3 years ago
gabbsmcswaggin
anonymouseStonewallTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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: pro is totally a troll
Vote Placed by Weiler 3 years ago
Weiler
anonymouseStonewallTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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: Anonymouse wasted everyone's time on this
Vote Placed by TheAntidoter 4 years ago
TheAntidoter
anonymouseStonewallTied
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: Conduct speaks for itself.
Vote Placed by Projectid 4 years ago
Projectid
anonymouseStonewallTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: The Con made far more reliable, convincing, non-crack pot arguments, and refuted all of the Pros points. Sources go to Con because the Pro didn't use any.
Vote Placed by The_Master_Riddler 4 years ago
The_Master_Riddler
anonymouseStonewallTied
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: None of Pro's arguments were warranted.
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 4 years ago
funwiththoughts
anonymouseStonewallTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Really Pro? Really? "To be a judge in the US, you must be corrupt"? That's not even remotely relevant. You completely dropped all your relevant points, instead focusing on your complete non-sequiturs, and refused to actually refute anything. Also, as far as I'm aware, there's no evidence that he has Jewish roots, aside from his last name, which on it's own doesn't prove anything.