The Instigator
Kellison
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Zaradi
Con (against)
Winning
22 Points

dogs are better pets then cats

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 4 votes the winner is...
Zaradi
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/23/2012 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,978 times Debate No: 21415
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (4)

 

Kellison

Pro

Dogs are better pets than cats for many reasons, the biggest reason is they will actually protect you in a dangerous situation. Cats would must likely sleep or run away if a burglar entered your house. Dogs will be loyal to you as cats are dirty and disrespectful. Dogs come to you when you call them cats only come to you if they want something. These are only a few reasons on why dogs are better than cats.
Zaradi

Con

I am personally appauled by my opponen't position. Being the current owner of both a dog and a cat, I know from first hand experience that cats are better than dogs. I shall attempt to prove such today, as well as disprove my opponent's position.

First, cats are lovable felines. They're just bundles of cute fur and purring and lovable to cuddle up with. Cuddling up with a Great Dane can get a bit awkward, since the Great Dane is almost as big as you are. Thusly, people can only truly admit the inner most secrets and come to terms with harms and personal suffering when snuggling with a cat.

Second, cats are much less expensive than dogs. Dogs require feeding three times a day, walking, cleaning up after, and constantly replacing toys that they destroy from their inferior intellect. Cats need feeding maybe once, twice a day, and eat much less. You don't have to take cats out for a walk, and giving them one toy will generally last them their entire life time unless a different idiot dog destroys their fun.

Third, cats take much less management to take care of than dogs. Like I stated above, dogs require walking in the mornings and nights, need to be taken outside often to do their dirty business, and cleaning up that dirty business can get really problematic if it involves picking up their "numero dos" from the wet ground. Cats don't need to be taken outside. They generally are able to take care of themselves. And it's much easier to safely pick up a cats doo-doo from a box of kitty litter than dog fecal matter from the damp earth.

But fourth, and my most potent argument, is that without cats, we would not have LOLcats.[1] Don't lie, everyone at one point or another has been on LOLcats and laughed at their incredible cuteness and funniness. It's practically a fact. But there is no LOLdogs. For this reason that it is more massively accessable to view the cuteness and amazingness of cats than dogs, cats are ergo better than dogs.

So for the above reasons, I submit that cats are better than dogs. Now I will refute my opponent's arguments.

My opponent claims that dogs will protect you from criminals better than cats. But this isn't true. If a big, burly criminal walked into my house in the night, what are the chances that my pet chiuaua would throw down with this frightening intruder? Not very likely.

But cats? Cats can protect. Dovahkitty will always Fus Ro Dah any burglars that try to steal away your lolcats pictures.[2]

My opponent claims that cats are also dirty and disrespectful, while dogs are not. But I would like to make a note to the viewers that if they have ever seen a dog rolling around in the mud and then come promptly charging into the home, getting mud everywhere, they would not call this good behavior. But cats are not disrespectful.

So, since I have sufficiently refuted my opponent's case, and supplied arguments of my own, I urge a vote for the con debater.

FUSS RO DAH!!!!!

Sources:
[1] http://www.lolcats.com...
[2] http://www.lolcats.com...;
Debate Round No. 1
Kellison

Pro

That's start with you first argument that people can only admit the secrets to a cat. Just because a cat is small and "cuddly" does not mean they will cuddle with you. Cats have crawls and scratch at you. They are independent animals and prefer to be in solitude. Dogs however look to please you at all times, hence why they learn to obey. Cats have no obedience towards humans.
Now with the second argument you posed cats are less expensive then dogs. Cats may not eat as much as a dog, but cats need a litter box which requires you to purchase litter. Which since you own a cat you know can be very expensive, and timely. Litter boxes must be scooped daily of their fecal matter, or they will not use it they will go in you bath tub. Not only must you clean the litter daily but you must empty it at least once a week and clean the entire box out. For the toy situation, cats do require new toys, scratching post?! If they do not have that they will be scratching your furniture, your carpet, and your walls. Cats also enjoy sleeping up in high places, so maybe on top of you fridge, which now makes you have to clean and sanitize that area, unless you enjoy cat hair in your food.
For your third argument, they take less management, yes you do not need to brush and wash them such as for a dog. Cats do require multiple visits to vets. They are more prone to tapeworms. Cats may not roll in the dirt but they do bring in mice and birds, dead ones.
Your most "potent argument" is a really bad one considering I do not sit on the computer and search Google, I have never heard of this LOLcats you speak of, this is because I am too busy playing and enjoying my dogs. If you have a cat obviously all you can do is stare at a picture of them because they do not want to play, they want to sleep and be by themselves.

So for the above reasons, I submit that dogs are better than cats!
Zaradi

Con

First, I would like to point out that my opponent only adressed the arguments I proposed for my case, not the responses against his case. For these reasons, they go conceded and can be cleanly extended. Dovahkitty Fus Ro Dah's and takes out the pro case. This is the first place to vote con, since the pro conceded the entirety of their case.

Secondly, I would like to also note that my opponent conceded in his last speech to ONLY owning dogs. This makes him a biased viewer for why dogs are better. I own both dogs and cats currently, making my views the only objective and non-biased point of view to look at in this debate.

Now, I'll adress the points against my case raised by my opponent.

RC1:

My opponent raises the point that cats scratch and are independent. That's totally fair, but my opponent assumes that ALL CATS scratch. This just isn't true. My cats, personally, were de-clawed for free when we adopted them, and thus can't scratch. Dogs, s on the other hand, have claws and bite. And as much as my opponent claims that all they do is please, I highly doubt they would like you snuggling up next to them. Cats are smaller and softer, making them easier to cuddle with.

Also, my opponent claims that cats have no obedience toward humans. That's flat out not true. My cat obeys when I ask him to come here because he knows that I feed him and control his supply of food. So he knows that if he does not please me, he does not get food. This causes him to obey what I ask, so that he can be fed and happy.

All arguments are successfully refuted. This contention can be cleanly extended across the round. This is the second place to vote con, since I'm providing you with a valid reason why cats are better than dogs.

RC2:

My opponent raises the point that cats need litter boxes to go doo-doo, and thus need to buy litter, which makes cats more expensive than dogs. This just isn't true. Bags of litter are rather inexpensive, maybe $15 for a large bag of litter, and can last months. My opponent also falsly claims that cat litter needs to be cleaned every day or else they take a poo in your bath tub. This, also, isn't true. Cat boxes need to be emptied once a week, and the litter changed once a month. For this reason, bags of litter can last anywhere from 6-10 months, if used efficiently.

My opponent brings up the scratching posts argument, but this is easily solved by getting your cat de-clawed. De-clawing your cat makes things easier overall so you aren't scratched, and are generally offered for free from wherever you adopt/purchase the cat from.

My opponent also claims that "cats only sleep in high places" which is just pure conjecture. My cats actually enjoy sleeping under my family's beds, and this applies to all the other cats that I have met in my lifetime. My opponent is merely grasping at straws, not actually refuting my contention.

His arguments have been refuted, so you can cleanly extend this argument. This is the third place to vote con.

RC3:

My opponent claims, without actually citing evidence to prove a point that needs scientific proof, that cats are more secceptable to tapeworms. In the history of all the cats I have owned, I have never had a cat that has had tapeworms. If they are as prone to getting tapeworms as my opponent claims, then this would not be the case.

Also, dogs require just as many visits to the vet as cats do, so this point is non-unique.

Also, my opponent, in his need for arguments against my case, has resorted to using stereotypes of cats by saying thaty they drag in dead mice and birds all the time. This flat out does not translate to the real world.

All arguments have been refuted. You can cleanly extend this argument. This is the fourth place to vote con.

RC4:

I had origionally used "most potent" argument in a sarcastic sense, but it has now become my most potent argument, since this is where you have responded the weakest too. All you have done to refute this point is resort to ad hom attacks against me and the cats I have had and have currently. Aside from ad hom, there have been no actual refutations to the point that lolcats pictures do bring joy to people and, since there are no loldogs pictures, are a reason why cats are better than dogs. This was never attacked, so you can count this contention as, basically, conceded. Extend it across the flow as the bottom line of where you vote con.

I have refuted all my opponent's arguments and extended all my points. Furthermore, my opponent did not respond to a single attack I made against his case, thus conceding his case. So because of this, my opponent LITERALLY does not have a single argument standing at this point. So there is literally no reason to not vote con.
Debate Round No. 2
Kellison

Pro

Kellison forfeited this round.
Zaradi

Con

Ah a forfeit. An interesting tactic to take for the final round when you're really far behind in the debate. But it was his choice.

But what does this forfeit mean for the debate?
1. Since he still has yet to defend the refutations against against his case, his case is effectively taken out. There are no arguments there that he can pull from to win the round.
2. Since he did not respond to my defense of my case, they are considered valid. So my entire case can be extended. There's no arguments for him to pull from to win the roud there, either.

So this raises the question of "How can my opponent win this round?"

The answer is rather simple: he can't.
Thus, I urge a con ballot.
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Zaradi 5 years ago
Zaradi
Best. Round. Evar.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by Guitar_Guru 5 years ago
Guitar_Guru
KellisonZaradiTied
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: FF loses conduct and arguments, especially since Con was pretty much winning on arguments anyway. Spelling and Grammar goes to Con because Pro's Spelling and Grammar are near despicable, and sources go to Con since he is the only one who really sites his stuff.
Vote Placed by KeytarHero 5 years ago
KeytarHero
KellisonZaradiTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro forfeited. Con formatted his arguments better and just gave stronger arguments.
Vote Placed by PeacefulChaos 5 years ago
PeacefulChaos
KellisonZaradiTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro did not even attempt to defend his case, and Con effectively destroyed it. Furthermore, Con provided better unbiased arguments compared to Pro, and Pro's refutations to them were rather weak. He made several stereotypes that ALL cats claw and bring in dead birds and mice, when this is certainly not the case. Con also gets conduct do to Pro's forfeits.
Vote Placed by Xerge 5 years ago
Xerge
KellisonZaradiTied
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: Con had a more compelling case of why dogs are not better than cats. Pro dropped arguments in the debate and forfeited the last round, leavng Con's arguments unaddressed.