The Instigator
toremyrat
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
emospongebob527
Con (against)
Winning
12 Points

family violance shoul be limited.

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 2 votes the winner is...
emospongebob527
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/27/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 564 times Debate No: 26618
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (2)

 

toremyrat

Pro

Today family voilance is reduced than it was before. And also, I dont think that violance will be increased in the future. Family violance doesnt bring good impact on children and even there is impact of it on infants. So, it must be limited.
emospongebob527

Con

I will be arguing that: Family violence should not be limited but completely gone.


State your case.
Debate Round No. 1
toremyrat

Pro

toremyrat forfeited this round.
emospongebob527

Con

BOP hasn't been fulfilled, I await.
Debate Round No. 2
toremyrat

Pro

toremyrat forfeited this round.
emospongebob527

Con

Vote Con.
Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
1) Learn to spell violence
2) Nobody is going to accept this debate, so stop making easy debates meant to give you an easy win
Posted by magikkell 4 years ago
magikkell
Who would possibly argue that there should be more family violence?
Posted by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
Do you know how to spell "violence"?

And why would you think that anyone would take this debate? There has to be a degree of controversy in the resolution or you're not likely to get an opponent.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by RyuuKyuzo 4 years ago
RyuuKyuzo
toremyratemospongebob527Tied
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: full ff
Vote Placed by CriticalThinkingMachine 4 years ago
CriticalThinkingMachine
toremyratemospongebob527Tied
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 thought that nobody would take this case because I didn't realize that there was more than one negation of the resolution, but Con realized that there was and made that his resolution. Pro then forfeited. Easy win for Con.