Debate Rounds (3)
Let's put what you said in perspective, shall we. Homosexuality was considered a mental illness. Black people were considered 3/5 of a person who couldn't own anything. Women were considered less than men. Autism was considered an untreatable mental retardation. It was thought that women determined the sex of a child.... that was disproved by science btw. The list goes on and do you know why? Because things change and life goes on. If you believe so much in the ideas of the past why don't you drink some monkey brain phosphorus to get smarter so you can better push your point.
DuhTruth forfeited this round.
I did, however, look at your comments.
You compaired homosexuals to pedifiles. People can not marry children because marrige should be between two consinting adults. Pedifiles wouldn't want to marry a child because children will grow up. Furthermore, any laws against pedifiels are not there because pedifiles are 'sexual deviants.' They are there to pretect children. Who is being protected with samesex marrige laws.
You also said that homosexuals would have been eliminated if they were born that way, wrong. Have you ever heard of a resesive trait. That meens one can cary a trait and not show sighns of it via a herosexual can have a homosexual child. DUH
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by whiteflame 2 years ago
|Agreed with before the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Agreed with after the debate:||-||-||0 points|
|Who had better conduct:||-||-||1 point|
|Had better spelling and grammar:||-||-||1 point|
|Made more convincing arguments:||-||-||3 points|
|Used the most reliable sources:||-||-||2 points|
|Total points awarded:||0||4|
Reasons for voting decision: *scratches his head* So, the topic was gay marriage. Pro uses this debate to discuss what he finds wrong with Con's views on gay people... Something's missing here. I don't even see any actual arguments except an assertion based on false analogies that just doesn't hold up in the slightest. I get where you're going with it, but the lack of warrants, links and analysis just makes it moot. Con never argued the resolution either, but since it's Pro's burden to actually follow the resolution he made, he loses the debate. He also loses a conduct point due to the forfeit. I don't agree with Con's arguments either, and there are a bunch of simple ways to disparage his sources (and since his links don't support the res, he's not getting sources), but without seeing those arguments, I have no choice but to side with the uncontested points of Con.
You are not eligible to vote on this debate
This debate has been configured to only allow voters who meet the requirements set by the debaters. This debate either has an Elo score requirement or is to be voted on by a select panel of judges.