The Instigator
american5
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
socialpinko
Pro (for)
Winning
42 Points

flag burning

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 - Required
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/25/2011 Category: Politics
Updated: 5 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 1,080 times Debate No: 16126
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (1)
Votes (8)

 

american5

Con

I think flag burning is wrong no madder weather its for your flag your burning or your enemy's, you should at least have the respect of your enemy not to destroy there symbol take it down and tuck it away or do something else but don't destroy it. I wish to state two points to start this debate.

My first point is that someone honors that flag people have fought and died for that flag and by destroying it you are spiting in there faces saying that their deaths are in vain if its your own and weather its yours or not some people honor that flag or have honored that flag which brings me to my next point.

If you destroy the flag of someone it dose not make them want to give up it just causes more hate and more violence..
socialpinko

Pro

I feel like I should define what exactly 'flag burning' is before I begin so as to keep confusion to a minimum.

Flag burning: the act of burning a flag, especially the flag of a nation as an act of protest at that nation's activities.[1]

Now I will respond to and refute my opponent's two contentions against flag burning.

Contention 1: Respect

My opponent claims that by burning a flag, you are "spitting in their(people who have fought and died for the country which the flag represents) faces..". I say that flags of specific countries are not the only ones which exist and which people may feel the need to burn. Flags can be used to represent sports teams[2], political and economic ideologies[3], or be used for fun on boats[4].

How many people have died defending the Miami Dolphins? Name one person who would have died in vain, if someone were to burn a flag used to represent the Dolphins.

Contention 2: Hate

My opponent claims that burning a flag only serves to create more hate and violence in the world and will not necessarily make one's enemies "give up". I will respond by saying that getting one's enemies to surrender is not always the purpose of a flag burning. A lot of the time it is used in protest. Usually to garner support for a cause or get people excited. I don't think anyone who has ever burned a flag expected their "enemy" to give up because of it.

[1]http://www.allwords.com...
[2]http://www.proflagsandbanners.com...
[3]http://www.crwflags.com...
[4]http://www.embassyflag.com...
Debate Round No. 1
american5

Con

I agree that no one has ever died for the Miami dolphins but on the other hand people still honor that flag so why would you burn it and as for gaining support and getting people fired up I can't think of an time when burning a flag gained support that was not already there or was wanting to join. Plus as for the Idea of firing people up their is other ways of getting people fired up without burning a flag like giving a speech or something of that nature not destroying someone's source of love not something that people have bleed for. Now as for it not meaning to cause hate I will beg to differ on that you don't destroy a flag and expect no one to be mad about it. Even if they do not think it will get them to give up they still expect them to feel a great pain.
socialpinko

Pro

"as for gaining support and getting people fired up I can't think of an time when burning a flag gained support that was not already there or was wanting to join."

Argument from ignorance. You cannot think of an example therefore you are right? And burning a flag shows just how serious people can get about issues.

"Plus as for the Idea of firing people up their is other ways of getting people fired up without burning a flag like giving a speech or something of that nature not destroying someone's source of love not something that people have bleed for."

Usually speeches are accompanied with flag burning but my opponent has not shown why this would be better other than not hurting people's feelings. I can tell you if I saw on television someone giving a speech against gay marriage my feelings might be hurt. Does that mean giving speeches is wrong because it personally hurts my feelings.

"Now as for it not meaning to cause hate I will beg to differ on that you don't destroy a flag and expect no one to be mad about it."

Just because someone gets offended at something does not mean that that was the intended reaction that one wants when they decide to do something.

My opponent has really simply reiterated his arguments about hate and respect and ignored my previous refutations. He has brought nothing new to this debate this round and I have again refuted the same arguments twice now.

Vote Pro



Debate Round No. 2
american5

Con

I would like to Start by saying that giving a speech may offend someone or hert their feelings it won't make them want to pick up a gun and go to war even if it is a team flag it makes people wan't to go and shoot them. Now a speech someone may get a offended but they don't want to kill anyone. Now as I said about if you burn a flag and don't mean to offend someone you still know it will.

Now as for the voters I would like you to just think think of how bad it would hert you if someone had burned a flag you support or even your country's flag and hounestly tell me that dose not make you wan't to fight don't you almost see that as a decrlation of war
socialpinko

Pro

My opponent in the last round has merely said the same thing which he has said from the beginning of the debate. He writes: "I would like to Start by saying that giving a speech may offend someone or hert their feelings it won't make them want to pick up a gun and go to war even if it is a team flag it makes people wan't to go and shoot them."

My opponent brings no evidence to show why giving a speech is any less offensive then burning a flag other than pretty much his own subjective feelings. Even if we agree that flag burning is offensive, why does that take away a person's right to do so? Racists are offended by minorities. Does that mean black people should have to cover their skin in public? Nazis are offended by Jews. Does that mean that Jews should be barred from places where a Nazi might hang out just to make sure no one if offended? Of course not. People get offended. People get offended at stupid things. Burning the flag of the Miami Dolphins might be the stupidest thing to get offended by.

My opponent ends be asking voters to think about what it would feel like if they saw someone burn the flag of their country. This is of course an appeal to emotion and voters should not take this into account when voting for a winner. It was my opponent's job to show why it was wrong to burn a flag and seeing as his arguments have been refuted, he appeals to the subjective emotions of the voters.

Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 3
1 comment has been posted on this debate.
Posted by Dawg_Face 5 years ago
Dawg_Face
Oops, thought I gave a point to CON, m'bad. If it comes down to one point, it was my fault.
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by jewgirl 5 years ago
jewgirl
american5socialpinkoTied
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: obvious.
Vote Placed by Cliff.Stamp 5 years ago
Cliff.Stamp
american5socialpinkoTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: This was lopsided Con simply ignored Pro and repeated appeals. To balance this out Pro should have debated while wrapped in a burning flag.
Vote Placed by kohai 5 years ago
kohai
american5socialpinkoTied
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: Con didn't attempt to rebute an of pro's claims and he had no arguments himself.
Vote Placed by ReformedArsenal 5 years ago
ReformedArsenal
american5socialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Con's argument is full of holes. Flag burning most certainly does spur people to action. Speeches most certainly spur people to violence (anyone seen Braveheart?)
Vote Placed by detachment345 5 years ago
detachment345
american5socialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Reasons for voting decision: obvious
Vote Placed by Dawg_Face 5 years ago
Dawg_Face
american5socialpinkoTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Overall, I believe that the PRO side took this debate. It was a good few rounds by both of you though, that's why I gave a point to the CON. IMPO - It's just a flag...... They may stand for something, but nowadays, it doesn't matter much.
Vote Placed by quarterexchange 5 years ago
quarterexchange
american5socialpinkoTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Con lost when he said we shouldn't burn any flag which Pro capitalized on. Pro provided sources for various claims while Con did not and I saw Con spell the word "matter" wrong.
Vote Placed by petersaysstuff 5 years ago
petersaysstuff
american5socialpinkoTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: I vote Pro because Con did minimal work as well as used :I would like you to just think think of how bad it would hert you if someone had burned a flag you support or even your country's flag and hounestly tell me that dose not make you wan't to fight don't you almost see that as a decrlation of war: as a voter. No evidence was brought by Con where as Pro refuted all arguments presented.