The Instigator
tbstate
Con (against)
Losing
47 Points
The Contender
I-am-a-panda
Pro (for)
Winning
51 Points

abortion..

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  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 11/2/2009 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,471 times Debate No: 9916
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (5)
Votes (15)

 

tbstate

Con

I'll be the pro-life defender.
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I thank my opponent for this debate.

As per the title, I'm presuming my opponent is defending the notion abortion should always be illegal. I will present (INSERT NUMBER) points on why, under certain circumstance, it should be legal.

== 1) HEALTH ==

If having the baby would result in the death of the mother and the child, then abortion is justified in that the inevitable death of the mother is saved. It idealogical to have the mother go through with labour should it kill her.

== 2) UNDER-AGE SEX ==

If someone under the legal age of sex conceives, it should then be legal. Why? If penetration of the vagina is indeed illegal if the legal age is not reached, why then should it be legal for vaginal penetration to occur the other way before that age?

== 3) BEFORE IT CAN FEEL PAIN ==

The following article [http://jama.ama-assn.org...] states that:

"Consequently, the capacity for conscious perception of pain can arise only after thalamocortical pathways begin to function, which may occur in the third trimester around 29 to 30 weeks' gestational age" [Paragraph 1, Conclusions]

and

"pain perception probably does not function before the third trimester" [ Paragraph 5, Conclusions]

This implies that up to the development of " thalamocortical pathways", a Foetus cannot feel pain. This means in the case of abortion the foetus does not feel pain.

Furthermore, the characteristics of living things re:

- Feeding
- Movement
- Respiration
- Excretion
- Growth
- Sensitivity
- Reproduction

(http://www.saburchill.com...)

As per this article, sensitivity is "Living things react to changes around them. We react to touch, light, heat, cold and sound, as do other living things."

Foetus', as per the study, cannot react to "touch, light, heat, cold and sound". Ergo, Foetus' cannot be classed as a living thing.

I wish my opponent good luck and good debate.

Panda
Debate Round No. 1
tbstate

Con

The baby inside the mother's womb is a genetically different human being than the mother, so the question is: how is killing a baby inside the womb or one minute out of the womb any different? A baby has brain activity at 19 days and the hearts begins to beat at 31 days. The definition of death is when the brain and heart stop. Abortion stops both, resulting in death, which is murder.

A key question to any pro-choice is: when does life begin? Can a baby take care of himself/herself immediately after he/she is born?

Abortionists use this as a very common reason in support of abortion is rape, but less than one percent of abortion is because of rape. Rape itself is a brutal act of stealing innocence, why compound that by taking more innocence?

The world, people, and government are here to protect the innocent. There are so many groups to protect dolphins, endangered species, fur, etc- but when is the world not responsible to protect the innocent? The most innocence of life is the baby in a womb. Lastly, the word ‘fetus' comes from Latin roots, meaning a child up to the age of eighteen.

1.Health: "If having the baby would result in the death of the mother and the child, then abortion is justified in that the inevitable death of the mother is saved. It idealogical to have the mother go through with labour should it kill her"
a.Abortion in no way is ever justified. First of all, you can always deliver the baby after 23 weeks, giving the mother and the baby a chance to live. Under 23 weeks- I ask you, wouldn't a parent always sacrifice their life for their child? How old does the baby have to be, for the parent to sacrifice their life for him/her?
2.Under-Age Sex: "If someone under the legal age of sex conceives, it should then be legal. Why? If penetration of the vagina is indeed illegal if the legal age is not reached, why then should it be legal for vaginal penetration to occur the other way before that age?"
a.Sex under the age of 18 is statutory rape, so the rapist is the guilty one. The baby is always the innocent one. The average age of intercourse is 14.7, many years under the age of 18.
b.Also, under-age sex is defended and promoted by pro-choice groups, like Planned-Parenthood. Instead of saying not to have sex because you are a minor, they give out condemns and birth control.
3.Before it can feel pain:
a.So you are saying, if one cannot feel pain, than it is okay to kill him/her? What if an adult is in a coma? Besides that point, a baby does feel pain. During amniocentesis, the baby moves. Also, during partial birth abortion the baby moves. The new protocol for partial birth abortions is giving a spinal epidural, so that the baby won't feel the pain and move.
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I thank my opponent for his response

== CON ==

"The baby inside the mother's womb is a genetically different human being than the mother, so the question is: how is killing a baby inside the womb or one minute out of the womb any different? A baby has brain activity at 19 days and the hearts begins to beat at 31 days. The definition of death is when the brain and heart stop. Abortion stops both, resulting in death, which is murder."

== PRO ==

Right, but according to your above definition, before 19 days an abortion is justified as brain activity has not started yet, nor has the heart.

Furthermore, the brain doesn't begin to develop 5 weeks into pregnancy "A neural groove (future spinal cord) forms over the notochord with a brain bulge at one end. Neuromeres appear" [http://en.wikipedia.org...]

And the heart doesn't begin to form until the 6th weeks "The heart bulges, further develops, and begins to beat in a regular rhythm.Septum primum (A precursor to the heart) appears." [http://en.wikipedia.org...]

Therefore, until the 5th week of pregnancy, under your logic, an abortion is not murder.

== CON ==

"The world, people, and government are here to protect the innocent. There are so many groups to protect dolphins, endangered species, fur, etc- but when is the world not responsible to protect the innocent? The most innocence of life is the baby in a womb. Lastly, the word ‘fetus' comes from Latin roots, meaning a child up to the age of eighteen."

== PRO ==

All of this is largely irrelevant.

Firstly, I never advocated supporting any of the above groups, and they're nto relevant to this debate, so strawman.

Secondly, it doesn't matter where the word foetus comes from, today it means the precursor to a baby in the womb during pregnancy.

== CON ==

"a.Abortion in no way is ever justified. First of all, you can always deliver the baby after 23 weeks, giving the mother and the baby a chance to live. Under 23 weeks- I ask you, wouldn't a parent always sacrifice their life for their child? How old does the baby have to be, for the parent to sacrifice their life for him/her?"

== PRO ==

Firstly, I put forward a scenario where delivering a baby would mean death for to the child and mother.

Secondly, parents can always have another child, and immediatley presuming all will sacrifice themselves for the child is illogical. The option for the parent to birth the foetus should be given to them, rather than forcing them to "sacrifice" themselves.

== CON ==

"sex under the age of 18 is statutory rape, so the rapist is the guilty one. The baby is always the innocent one. The average age of intercourse is 14.7, many years under the age of 18."

== PRO ==

The rapist may be guilty, and the average age of sex may be 14 years old, but this is largely irrelevant. The law states someone under the age of 18 may not engage in the act of sex. Insofar as that, why should child birth, the same act upon a women, be legal?

== CON ==

"Also, under-age sex is defended and promoted by pro-choice groups, like Planned-Parenthood. Instead of saying not to have sex because you are a minor, they give out condemns and birth control.

== PRO ==

So? I never stated I supported planned parenthood. Besides, contraception is not always 100% effective.

== CON ==

"So you are saying, if one cannot feel pain, than it is okay to kill him/her? What if an adult is in a coma? Besides that point, a baby does feel pain. During amniocentesis, the baby moves. Also, during partial birth abortion the baby moves. The new protocol for partial birth abortions is giving a spinal epidural, so that the baby won't feel the pain and move."

== PRO ==

If I'm in a coma, I can hear things. I have fully developed organs. I am simply a human in a prolonged vegetative state. Anyone may go into a coma. I will never be a foetus.

A baby does feel pain? You're goign to need sources to back that up., and besides I already have a link proving that up to the third trimester a foes cannot feel pain.

Panda
Debate Round No. 2
tbstate

Con

Picture this image for me…a fetus or baby, whatever word you would like to use, with fingers, toes, fingernails, toenails, limbs, etcf, eatures me and you have- and then … The D&X abortion procedure itself is rather gruesome. The abortion practitioner instrumentally reaches into the uterus, grasps the fetus' feet, and pulls the feet down into the cervix. Often, especially in younger fetuses, limbs are ripped off bodies during the procedure. Once the fetus has been delivered except for the head, surgical scissors are forced into the base of the fetal skull and the its brains are sucked out. The baby is then delivered dead. The entire procedure is almost always performed on the fetus without the use of anesthesia.

Both the women and the pre-born are affected by abortion. The baby has no choice, voice, anything in the decision made on the abortion. Biologically, human life begins at the single cell stage (fertilization) when sperm and egg join. There is no question that the fetus is fully human and a member of the human family. Intentionally killing any human at any stage is wrong.

Because the pre-born baby is a human, abortion is a human rights issue. Human life- from fertilization to natural death- holds intrinsic and inestimable worth apart from how old you are and where you live.

-Heart before 19 days…-
•The heart is formed before nineteen days. There are heart cells before activity
•www.acog.org ( more credible than your wikipedia sources)
You go on saying that my points are irrelevant, although they defend my case and go against your points. These points are very relevant to the argument of abortion.

•Protecting human life- It is the core of the argument. Abortion is the taking away of human life.
•Having another baby- This is an irrelevant argument. Who cares if you can have another baby, that does not take away for killing a baby before.
•Feeling pain- yes
ohttp://www.abortionfacts.com...

oA recent study examined the question of fetal pain through the direct measurement of cortical brain responses in premature infants.Using real-time near-infrared spectroscopy, blood flow in the contralateral somatosensory cortex of the brain was measured during routine blood draws. The results showed that cortical blood flow was significantly elevated in infants as young as 25 weeks gestational age during needle puncture to draw blood. It was also noted that cortical brain response was higher in awake infants than those who were asleep. These results showed that the fetal brain can detect pain at least at 25 weeks of age. Since no premature infants were younger than 25 weeks, it did not determine the earliest age at which the fetus would feel pain.
oThe Journal of Neuroscience 26: 3662-3666.
ohttp://www.godandscience.org...

www.focusonthefamily.com
I-am-a-panda

Pro

I thank my opponent for his round 3 response.

"Picture this image for me…a fetus or baby, whatever word you would like to use, with fingers, toes, fingernails, toenails, limbs, etcf, eatures me and you have- and then … The D&X abortion procedure itself is rather gruesome. The abortion practitioner instrumentally reaches into the uterus, grasps the fetus' feet, and pulls the feet down into the cervix. Often, especially in younger fetuses, limbs are ripped off bodies during the procedure. Once the fetus has been delivered except for the head, surgical scissors are forced into the base of the fetal skull and the its brains are sucked out. The baby is then delivered dead. The entire procedure is almost always performed on the fetus without the use of anesthesia."

--> Appeal to emotion does not override scientific fact. I could describe step by step the process of excretion, but it doesn't take away from what excretion, in scientific terms, is.

Furthermore, my opponent is giving a very misleading picture of abortion. There are many forms of abortion, including non-surgical abortion, all detailed here: http://www.fwhc.org...

"Both the women and the pre-born are affected by abortion. The baby has no choice, voice, anything in the decision made on the abortion. Biologically, human life begins at the single cell stage (fertilization) when sperm and egg join. There is no question that the fetus is fully human and a member of the human family. Intentionally killing any human at any stage is wrong."

--> The foetus is not a human. As aforementioned, it is basically a clump of tissue for 5 weeks until it develop the ability to feel pain, have a heartbeat, etc. Making the point of conception the point where human life forms is opening the way for ridiculous laws. What next, banning the act of masturbation? A fused egg and sperm is not a human. Furthermore, a foetus is reliant on it's mother for air, food, etc., essentially, the ability for it to live. Insofar as that, a foetus is a parasite. Because the foetus is a parasite, the mother is killing a part of her which she had no say in whether or not it should be there. The foetus is essentially an extension of the mother util birth, and therefore the mother is the foetus voice.

"Because the pre-born baby is a human, abortion is a human rights issue. Human life- from fertilization to natural death- holds intrinsic and inestimable worth apart from how old you are and where you live."

--> I just proved how it isn't a human.

"•The heart is formed before nineteen days. There are heart cells before activity
•www.acog.org ( more credible than your wikipedia sources)
You go on saying that my points are irrelevant, although they defend my case and go against your points. These points are very relevant to the argument of abortion."

--> Firstly, www.acog.com leads me to the homepage, you're going to have to show me the specific page on the matter.

Secondly, if the heart does indeed form in 19 days, then abortion is justified within 19 days.

Thirdly, your points on the origin of the word foetus was irrelevant modern day meaning, and the part on dolphins was also irrelevant because I never said dolphins should be protected.

"Protecting human life- It is the core of the argument. Abortion is the taking away of human life."

--> No, it's taking away a clump of cells up until 5 weeks.

"•Having another baby- This is an irrelevant argument. Who cares if you can have another baby, that does not take away for killing a baby before."

--> This was in context of a mothers life versus a foetus' potential life. Don't take it out of context.

"Feeling pain- yes"

--> The article actually says "Try sticking an 8 week old human foetus in the palm of his hand. He opens his mouth and pulls his hand away." implying a baby can only feel hen it's 8 weeks old, an improvement on my 5 weeks :).

"A recent study examined the question of fetal pain through the direct measurement of cortical brain responses in premature infants.Using real-time near-infrared spectroscopy, blood flow in the contralateral somatosensory cortex of the brain was measured during routine blood draws. The results showed that cortical blood flow was significantly elevated in infants as young as 25 weeks gestational age during needle puncture to draw blood. It was also noted that cortical brain response was higher in awake infants than those who were asleep. These results showed that the fetal brain can detect pain at least at 25 weeks of age. Since no premature infants were younger than 25 weeks, it did not determine the earliest age at which the fetus would feel pain.
oThe Journal of Neuroscience 26: 3662-3666."

--> 25 weeks, an even bigger improvement. Remember, I have to only defend certain forms of abortion, you want it outlawed completley.

Panda
Debate Round No. 3
tbstate

Con

Right away, some will say that abortion is not a matter of life and death, arguing that a fetus is not a "person", or a "human being". Yet, medical research proves that the fetus is a living organism from the moment of conception. Though it may be argued that this living organism is not a person, it seems that it can be nothing other than a human being. I realize that it may be difficult to think of a three-week old fetus as a human with rights. The way I think to best explain this is to start by going back to the sperm and the egg.

A sperm has 23 chromosomes and no matter what, even though it is alive and can fertilize an egg it can never make another sperm. An egg also has 23 chromosomes and it can never make another egg. So we have eggs and sperm that cannot reproduce. A solitary egg or a solitary sperm does not have the complete genetic code for a separate human being. The ovum and the sperm are each a product of another's body: unlike the fertilized egg, neither is an independent entity. Neither one is complete. Like cells in someone's hair or fingernails, an egg or sperm does not have the capacity to become other than what it already is. Both are essentially dead-ends, destined to remain what they are until they die in a matter of days. This negates one common argument - that the unborn isn't human, or else every time a man ejaculated, or a woman menstruated, an "unborn" dies. Obviously this is ridiculous - a sperm without an egg and an egg without a sperm does NOT constitute human life.

Once there is the union of a sperm and egg, the 23 chromosomes are brought together in one cell with 46 chromosomes. Once there are 46 chromosomes, that one cell has all of the DNA, the whole genetic code for a genetically distinct human life. It isn't a "potential" human life, or some "other" type of life because something non-human does not magically become human by getting older and bigger - whatever is human must be human from the beginning. Everything that constitutes a human being is present from that moment forward - the only thing added from that point on is nutrition so the unborn can grow. This new life is not a sperm or an egg, or even a simple combination of both. It is independent with a life of its own, and the development is actually self-directed. A sperm can't do that - neither can an egg. They do not "develop".

The baby's blood supply is also completely separate from the mother's. If they are not separate bodies, how could a mother and child have different blood types? If a child's and mother's blood mix, it can be fatal for the child if the Rh factors are different. There is a shot to prevent this, but if there is not, and the blood of different Rh factors mix, the baby can die. Now, I cannot think of any doctor that would kill a newborn baby the moment that it was born. My question is now, can that baby be killed a minute before it is born, or a minute before that, or a minute before that? You see what I'm getting at. At what minute can one consider life to be worthless and at the next minute that life to be precious?
Even most medical texts and pro-choice doctors agree with pro-choice geneticist Ashley Montagu, who has written: "The basic fact is simple:life begins not at birth, but at conception." The beginning of human life is not a religious, moral, or philosophical issue; it is a scientific and biological one. From the time those 23 chromosomes become 46 onward, the unborn is a living, developing individual with a unique genetic makeup.
What surprised me most was statements from abortionists themselves who seemed to know that they were destroying life, a human life. For instance:
Neville Sender, M.D., who runs an abortion clinic, Metropolitan Medical Service, in Milwaukee, Wisconsin: "We know it is killing, but the states permit killing under certain circumstances."
Warren Hern, M.D., of the Boulder Abortion Clinic in Boulder Colorado: "There is no possibility of denial of an act of destruction by the operator. It is before one's eyes. The sensations of dismemberment flow through the forceps like an electric current."
Abortionist at a New York City hospital, as quoted by psychologist Magda Denes in her book, In Necessity and Sorrow: "Even now I feel a little peculiar about it, because as a physician I'm trained to conserve life and here I am destroying life."
Ron Fitzsimmons, executive director of the National Coalition of Abortion Providers: "Women enter abortion clinics to kill their fetuses. It is a form of killing. You're ending a life."

http://www.gargaro.com...

http://www.foxnews.com... (interesting story)
I-am-a-panda

Pro

"A sperm has 23 chromosomes and no matter what, even though it is alive and can fertilize an egg it can never make another sperm. An egg also has 23 chromosomes and it can never make another egg. So we have eggs and sperm that cannot reproduce. A solitary egg or a solitary sperm does not have the complete genetic code for a separate human being. The ovum and the sperm are each a product of another's body: unlike the fertilized egg, neither is an independent entity. Neither one is complete. Like cells in someone's hair or fingernails, an egg or sperm does not have the capacity to become other than what it already is. Both are essentially dead-ends, destined to remain what they are until they die in a matter of days. This negates one common argument - that the unborn isn't human, or else every time a man ejaculated, or a woman menstruated, an "unborn" dies. Obviously this is ridiculous - a sperm without an egg and an egg without a sperm does NOT constitute human life."

--> I can follow your logic in that if the cells of a foetus have the potential to reproduce, but the foetus is aborted, it's killing potential life. This can be followed down the chain back to sperm and eggs.

"Once there is the union of a sperm and egg, the 23 chromosomes are brought together in one cell with 46 chromosomes. Once there are 46 chromosomes, that one cell has all of the DNA, the whole genetic code for a genetically distinct human life. It isn't a "potential" human life, or some "other" type of life because something non-human does not magically become human by getting older and bigger - whatever is human must be human from the beginning. Everything that constitutes a human being is present from that moment forward - the only thing added from that point on is nutrition so the unborn can grow. This new life is not a sperm or an egg, or even a simple combination of both. It is independent with a life of its own, and the development is actually self-directed. A sperm can't do that - neither can an egg. They do not "develop"."

--> See here's the problem - When we begin to save things from their potential to be something, it goes into the ridiculous. A sperm and an egg have the potential to be an unborn baby, so under your logic they should not be "killed" under any circumstances.

Furthermore, the DNA part is irrelevant. Rhesus monkeys have 93% common DNA as us http://www.livescience.com....

Should they get 93% of human rights?

"The baby's blood supply is also completely separate from the mother's. If they are not separate bodies, how could a mother and child have different blood types? If a child's and mother's blood mix, it can be fatal for the child if the Rh factors are different. There is a shot to prevent this, but if there is not, and the blood of different Rh factors mix, the baby can die. Now, I cannot think of any doctor that would kill a newborn baby the moment that it was born. My question is now, can that baby be killed a minute before it is born, or a minute before that, or a minute before that? You see what I'm getting at. At what minute can one consider life to be worthless and at the next minute that life to be precious?"

--> I have consistently stated that is is not human until it can feel and\or has a beating heart. I never advocated killing a foetus a minute before it's birth

==CONCLUSIONS==

1) My opponent has not addressed my argument about a mother dying should a birth be fatally potential to her and the baby

2) My opponent does not have scientific studies to back up his birth starts at conception claim
Debate Round No. 4
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by tbstate 4 years ago
tbstate
yeahhh i thought the same exact thing when i read it..i was like wtf?
Posted by Nails 4 years ago
Nails
After reading the debate, I think CON won the point that abortion as a general principle is bad (though there may be exceptions, like health risk, as PRO pointed out) and, since CON never specified, I'd consider 'as a general principle' sufficient to win the argumentation vote.

Very nice conduct, grammar, and use of sources on both sides. All 3 of those issues are tied.
Posted by Lifeisgood 4 years ago
Lifeisgood
*Rubs temples*

I'm so tired of this topic. Why did I even read this debate? Why can't I be interested in a topic which is not quite so morbid?
Posted by Alex 4 years ago
Alex
I'm not sure where in the resolution it says "Abortion should always be illegal" but then again he didn't specify so i'll cut ya some slack panda =P
Posted by I-am-a-panda 4 years ago
I-am-a-panda
Whoops! I left (INSERT NUMBER) in there when I was unsure of how many points I was going to do. It should be 3 >.<
15 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Danielle 4 years ago
Danielle
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by CRL 4 years ago
CRL
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Crush 4 years ago
Crush
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:60 
Vote Placed by Koopin 4 years ago
Koopin
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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:61 
Vote Placed by kalyse020908 4 years ago
kalyse020908
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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 
Vote Placed by MasterDebaterMK 4 years ago
MasterDebaterMK
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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 
Vote Placed by mrprez19 4 years ago
mrprez19
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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 
Vote Placed by Korashk 4 years ago
Korashk
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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:16 
Vote Placed by philosphical 4 years ago
philosphical
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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:70 
Vote Placed by Rob1Billion 4 years ago
Rob1Billion
tbstateI-am-a-pandaTied
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