The Instigator
HadenQuinlan
Con (against)
Losing
24 Points
The Contender
draxxt
Pro (for)
Winning
48 Points

draxxt is a homosexual and wants me to give him AIDS

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  
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: 4/21/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,798 times Debate No: 3730
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (22)
Votes (20)

 

HadenQuinlan

Con

I'll allow my opponent first statement.

Best of luck to you, and let's have a fun round, shall we?
draxxt

Pro

Now, as you know, my debate.org page says I am heterosexual. This is true.

BUT, if we examine the word "homosexual" carefully, we find one important detail:

The greek root "homo" means same
The greek root "sex" means gender.

If we break this up in an entirely different way, we may see that I loce the same gender every time. This gender is the female one.

Also, if my opponent were to give me AIDS, I would be able to give myself up for the research to cure AIDS. I would endure tests and hardships all in the name of curing it for future generations. This would be a worthy and noble cause and would better mankind, something my opponent has talked highly of.

For the reasons above, you vote PRO.

Thank you, and I await your rebuttal.
-EG

(Also, if anyone is interested in the suspension story, you may find it at this site: http://www.facebook.com... )
Debate Round No. 1
HadenQuinlan

Con

My opponents entire argument is based around redefining a word, however this is flimsy and weak, at best. A definition from a word does not come solely from an interpretation of the roots, it also comes from the context the word is used, and the literal definition of the word. So let's break down the definition into these three categories...

Roots: "Homo" means same, however with some small, preliminary searching I have not found a definition for the root "sexual", so i'll contest this point and I'd like you to give me a source, but I'll continue with the "Same gender" anyways. Same gender does not imply "having sex with the same gender every time", because then heterosexual (different gender) would imply that you sleep with a different gender, so it would rotate from guy to girl, however having sex with a guy then switching to girl doesn't mean you can go back to guy. That would violate "different gender".So you'd only have sex twice. Instead it means, "You have sex with a DIFFERENT gender" (heterosexual). So, homosexual means, by the root words, "You have sex with the SAME gender".

Context: It means to be attracted, sexually, to the same gender as yourself. Contextually, as you can see by what I've presented above and will continue to present, 'homosexual' means "attracted to the same gender sexually".

Literal Definition(http://dictionary.reference.com...): "Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex."

So as you can see, this is the definition of homosexual.

On to the actual evidence presented:

"Now, as you know, my debate.org page says I am heterosexual. This is true."

This refutes any point he can possibly make. Vote Con.
draxxt

Pro

Thanks again for this debate, And best of luck in R3.

First of all:

"Roots: "Homo" means same, however with some small, preliminary searching I have not found a definition for the root "sexual", so i'll contest this point and I'd like you to give me a source, but I'll continue with the "Same gender" anyways. Same gender does not imply "having sex with the same gender every time", because then heterosexual (different gender) would imply that you sleep with a different gender, so it would rotate from guy to girl, however having sex with a guy then switching to girl doesn't mean you can go back to guy. That would violate "different gender".So you'd only have sex twice. Instead it means, "You have sex with a DIFFERENT gender" (heterosexual). So, homosexual means, by the root words, "You have sex with the SAME gender". "

...Every time. "You have sex with the same gender (Every time)" I will define the word "same" for the sake of my semantics argument.

Merriam Webster defines
same as "being one without addition, change, or discontinuance"

There is no discontinuance in my attraction to women.

"Contextually, as you can see by what I've presented above and will continue to present, 'homosexual' means "attracted to the same gender sexually". "

...
...Every time.

"Literal Definition(http://dictionary.reference.com......): "Of, relating to, or having a sexual orientation to persons of the same sex."
Is it not clear that I am arguing that by homosexual, I AM loving the same sex. Not in the sense that I love the same sex as is identical to me but in the sense that there is consistancy.

I must also mention that my opponent has dropped his entire defense against my AIDS case, so, for the time being, he has dropped it.

For the reasons above, you vote PRO.
Thanks,
-EG
Debate Round No. 2
HadenQuinlan

Con

I wrote out a really long semantics argument, but then I realized something, I don't need to type that. I do however need to address the AIDS argument.

"Also, if my opponent were to give me AIDS, I would be able to give myself up for the research to cure AIDS. I would endure tests and hardships all in the name of curing it for future generations. This would be a worthy and noble cause and would better mankind, something my opponent has talked highly of."

First off, I have never addressed "worthiness and nobility". So we can discount this falsehood. Also, I'd like to point out that there is no purpose of helping to cure AIDS. My opponent assumes to be logical, and therefore if he has he must realize that there is no personal benefit to giving yourself aids, and he must also realize that there is no objective morality. What benefit is there of curing AIDS to yourself if you must contract the disease and endure hardships? It is much more likely that you will die via AIDS than cure the disease, so you can see that the only personal benefit is some sense of smugness, but living is a much greater benefit than being smug. Objective morality cannot possibly exist, so my opponents statements of worthiness and nobility can clearly be discounted. So the only way my opponent can agree with the above statement is if he claims to be illogical, in which case you must default con because my opponent is an illogical being.

So to address the homosexual / heterosexual argument:

Homosexual and heterosexual, by my definition OR his are still mutually exclusive terms. By my definition heterosexual means loving a different sex than yourself, whereas homosexual means loving the same sex as yourself. If we are to use his definition of homosexual it means unwaveringly loving the same sex, so heterosexual means that you love different sexes.

My opponent has conceded this entire round with the statement:

"Now, as you know, my debate.org page says I am heterosexual. This is true."

As I have shown, homosexual and heterosexual are mutually exclusive terms, regardless of the semantics behind them. Because of this, my opponent agrees to being heterosexual - removing the possibility of being homosexual.

If you've got any grain of logical fibre within your brain, the winner of this debate is clear.

Vote Con.
draxxt

Pro

My opponent has given me a challenge but by the end of my final speech, you will most logically, vote PRO. (To take a page from Logical_Master, this music would begin playing as I deliver my refutations http://youtube.com... "

"First off, I have never addressed "worthiness and nobility". So we can discount this falsehood. Also, I'd like to point out that there is no purpose of helping to cure AIDS. My opponent assumes to be logical, and therefore if he has he must realize that there is no personal benefit to giving yourself aids, and he must also realize that there is no objective morality. What benefit is there of curing AIDS to yourself if you must contract the disease and endure hardships? It is much more likely that you will die via AIDS than cure the disease, so you can see that the only personal benefit is some sense of smugness, but living is a much greater benefit than being smug. Objective morality cannot possibly exist, so my opponents statements of worthiness and nobility can clearly be discounted. So the only way my opponent can agree with the above statement is if he claims to be illogical, in which case you must default con because my opponent is an illogical being."

My opponent says that I claim worthiness and nobility are the prime factors in my argument of AIDS. That is not true. I simply made an observation that certain people and, indeed, myself might consider it as such. That being said, I have always said morality is subjective. The resolution states "...and wants me to give him AIDS" My opponent gives no alternative so I assume the most logical choice: "...and wants me to give him AIDS" under certain binding circumstances. That being said, I would want to recieve AIDS (Preferably in the act of blood transfusion) If that were the only option which, under the resolution, it is.

"Homosexual and heterosexual, by my definition OR his are still mutually exclusive terms. By my definition heterosexual means loving a different sex than yourself, whereas homosexual means loving the same sex as yourself. If we are to use his definition of homosexual it means unwaveringly loving the same sex, so heterosexual means that you love different sexes."

My opponent has overlooked the fact that, as is with morality, our definitions of homosexual are subjective and he has not proved to anyone how the word cannot be taken under a different context, though he has claimed that the context is everything in this debate. I perceived the context under which the word homosexual means loving the same sex each time or being attracted to the same sex each time. I have also declared that I am "homosexual" for women.

The statement my opponent refers to is simply another context. I take the dictionary context of heterosexual for this debate. I take a personal context for the word homosexual.
Thank you and any logical judge will vote Pro.

Thanks again and good debate,
-EG
Debate Round No. 3
22 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by draxxt 9 years ago
draxxt
Yes. I have made it my life's purpose to piss Kleptin off.
Posted by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
First of all, I'd like to say that debates that are clearly supposed to be rigged piss me off. I fully approve of using whatever clever little tricks, arguments by semantics included, in winning them.

However, I'm disappointed in that Pro had a nice chance to flex his creative muscle and wasted it with a rather poor argument.

Better luck next time o.O
Posted by Geekis_Khan 9 years ago
Geekis_Khan
Oh, and you got your definition from dictionary.com?

...Interesting...

"homosexual

adjective
1. sexually attracted to members of your own sex [ant: bisexual, heterosexual] "
Posted by Geekis_Khan 9 years ago
Geekis_Khan
Oh, and Eli. You admitted you were heterosexual in your first speech. I don't care what lame semantic arguments or stupid redefining of words you want to do, you conceded.
Posted by Geekis_Khan 9 years ago
Geekis_Khan
Anyone who redefines a word should lose.
Posted by HadenQuinlan 9 years ago
HadenQuinlan
This is pathetic. I can't believe the turnout for this, are people blind?
Posted by draxxt 9 years ago
draxxt
It's sad when someone actually WANTS Haden's respect...
Posted by HadenQuinlan 9 years ago
HadenQuinlan
your final argument is so ludicrous I want to punch you. Whoever votes PRO has lost my respect.
Posted by HadenQuinlan 9 years ago
HadenQuinlan
different gender than yourself.

That statement's implied.
Posted by draxxt 9 years ago
draxxt
I am not going to forfeit I just had to work lately. I'll rebuke after my "Life is a party" debate argument.
20 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Koopin 7 years ago
Koopin
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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 Nails 7 years ago
Nails
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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 
Vote Placed by draxxt 8 years ago
draxxt
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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 HadenQuinlan 9 years ago
HadenQuinlan
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 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:30 
Vote Placed by bexy_kelly 9 years ago
bexy_kelly
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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 
Vote Placed by Rich_Ruiz 9 years ago
Rich_Ruiz
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by Ineffablesquirrel 9 years ago
Ineffablesquirrel
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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 
Vote Placed by Kleptin 9 years ago
Kleptin
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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:30 
Vote Placed by repete21 9 years ago
repete21
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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 
Vote Placed by Issa 9 years ago
Issa
HadenQuinlandraxxtTied
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