The Instigator
cheyennebodie
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
AlternativeDavid
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

liberalism is driven by emotions, not truth.

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...
AlternativeDavid
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 8/30/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 715 times Debate No: 61082
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (4)

 

cheyennebodie

Pro

That is why liberals always parade people who have problems in front of everybody, never researching WHY they have these problems.The worst judgments in our courts are from an emotional response to a situation.
AlternativeDavid

Con

Pro has full burden of proof to show that liberalism, as an ideology, is driven solely by emotions, and not by truth.

"That is why liberals always parade people who have problems in front of everybody, never researching WHY they have these problems."

Pro made two absolute statements here. All I have to do if find one time where liberals did not parade somebody with problems, and one time where liberals researched why they have problems.

I just researched why I have problems: https://www.google.com... Now this absolute statement has been disproven.

Here's an example of somebody with problems that isn't being paraded around by liberals: http://www.kiva.org... This woman is having trouble making ends meet as a pharmacist in Mongolia. According to pro, liberals should have thrown her a parade.

-Pro has failed to mention which problems these are.
-Pro has also failed to provide prove the ideology of liberals is driven by emotion alone, without a single bit of truth.

"The worst judgments in our courts are from an emotional response to a situation."

Would Pro care to provide examples?

In summary, the ideology of liberalism is not driven solely by emotion.
Debate Round No. 1
cheyennebodie

Pro

Case in point. Liberals paraded a person,sandra Fluke, to try to get us to pay for her birth control.How sick is that. Let her pay for her own lifestyle. And where is the guys contribution.Or a welfare mother that cant pay for Christmas presents, but looks like she can afford a hundred dollars a week in twinkies. And let us just sugjest that she use better judgment on who she sleeps with and you are hounded as a hater.Or how about saying it is not a baby because he/she doesn't have air in he/she's lungs.Or how about taking our guns away because someone shoots people in a GUN FREE ZONE. We should be outlawing gun free zones. The only thing that will stop a bag guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.Policew were not the first responders at sandyhook. The victims were. And they were ill prepared for what happened.Twenty kids mowed down because of liberalism that outlawed the second amendment.
AlternativeDavid

Con

This sounds more like a rant than an argument. Pro is using the term "liberals" as if every liberal makes unilateral decisions. The resolution that Pro made was that liberalism is driven by emotion, and no truth. Pro seems to have completely abandoned this resolution.

"Or a welfare mother that cant pay for Christmas presents, but looks like she can afford a hundred dollars a week in Twinkies"

Healthier food is more expensive. It's not a poor person's fault for not being able to afford it. Many people only have the option of McDonalds, and Hostess, and other crappy foods, simply because they lack the funds to buy salads and grass fed beef.

"We should be outlawing gun free zones. The only thing that will stop a bag guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."

Guns don't actually do that. Not a single one of the 62 mass shootings in (the US) the last 30 years have been stopped by a "good guy with a gun." [1]. Pro's contention about guns doesn't hold water.

"Twenty kids mowed down because of liberalism that outlawed the second amendment."

Is Pro suggesting that we arm elementary(primary) school students? Did he not see the result of a 9 year old girl being taught how to use an Uzi? [2]. Spoiler alert: The instructor is dead.

---
Pro has failed to give any proof that the ideology of liberalism is fueled by emotion instead of truth.


[1] http://www.motherjones.com...
[2] http://www.nytimes.com...
Debate Round No. 2
cheyennebodie

Pro

Case in point. Liberals paraded a person,sandra Fluke, to try to get us to pay for her birth control.How sick is that. Let her pay for her own lifestyle. And where is the guys contribution.Or a welfare mother that cant pay for Christmas presents, but looks like she can afford a hundred dollars a week in twinkies. And let us just sugjest that she use better judgment on who she sleeps with and you are hounded as a hater.Or how about saying it is not a baby because he/she doesn't have air in he/she's lungs.Or how about taking our guns away because someone shoots people in a GUN FREE ZONE. We should be outlawing gun free zones. The only thing that will stop a bag guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.Policew were not the first responders at sandyhook. The victims were. And they were ill prepared for what happened.Twenty kids mowed down because of liberalism that outlawed the second amendment.
AlternativeDavid

Con

Did Pro just copy and paste his previous round argument? I don't know about the voters, but I think that should count out as a forfeit.

Even if Pro's arguments were logically sound, his arguments were unrelated to the resolution.
Pro has failed to prove that liberalism is fueled by emotions instead of truth. Vote Con!
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by GoOrDin 2 years ago
GoOrDin
Wish I could vote, Cheyennebodie is correct regardless of how poor her debate or strong her opponents. Didn't rad this, simply reviewing Cheyenne's history and record.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
And thank you for voting. Fortunately I am not on here to win votes.I am not a politician.I have strong opinions and am at liberty to voice them
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
The mature man is not driven by emotions but by good judgment. Emotions are fickle. You can feel one way today and another way tomorrow.But beliefs from a fixed heart made by a quality decision will stand fast under any pressure.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
The mature man is not driven by emotions but by good judgment. Emotions are fickle. You can feel one way today and another way tomorrow.But beliefs from a fixed heart made by a quality decision will stand fast under any pressure.
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
Healthier food is more expensive.That is an idiot statement, SINCE THE WORD Says that the drunk and the glutton shall come to poverty. Her twinkie buys are what fuels her lack of good judgment to produce self-suffient wealth.The adults at sandyhook, who were the first responders, responded with pencils instead of guns.And most of those mass shootings occurred in gun free zones. The mass murderer is smarter than liberals. He knows not to go to a zone where guns could be.Even that shooting at fort hood, army base, was a gun free zone. How insane is that.My daughter got a call from a company that sold home burglar alarms. She said," we don't need one. Every one in this neighborhood owns a gun.'And most of those shooters killed themselves when finally confronted with a man with a gun.I won the argument . But con has put his liberal blinders on and will not see. Has eyes but cannot come to the knowledge of the truth.
Posted by Osiris_Rosenthorne 2 years ago
Osiris_Rosenthorne
I like how the proposition says liberalism is driven by emotion, and then presents his case entirely from self interested, egotistical hate. It registers as quite amusing, but shock, imagine people responding by emotions, aren't we all meant to be droids, slaves to either markets or musings from the *heavens* like the right would suggest.
Posted by AlternativeDavid 2 years ago
AlternativeDavid
How about you go in the actual debate so I can properly strike down everything you just stated?
Posted by cheyennebodie 2 years ago
cheyennebodie
How many times have liberals paraded people out that want higher wages by government force. When is s responsibility to increase a persons skill level that a company would pay more money to do. It falls on the shoulder of the adult that wants to make more money, not government. They have paraded people out that want me to pay for their birth control. How sick is that. Make the two who are having this action pay for it.How many times have we seen people paraded out to increase welfare. Never getting into their lifestyle that causes this want.How many times have we seen court cases that awards huge judgments to someone just because the defendant has deep pockets. Case in point, the woman awarded a million dollars because the coffee she spilled on herself was hot.Every welfare payment is stolen property by government.I could go on and on.
Posted by Rasputin45 2 years ago
Rasputin45
Your first round is flawed.

You have made proposition in the title and then, while assuming your proposition is true without presenting an argument let alone evidence, describe liberals' actions without showing where or when they have done this.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by NathanDuclos 2 years ago
NathanDuclos
cheyennebodieAlternativeDavidTied
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: Conduct, for last round goes to con. Rants are not debates, goes to con.
Vote Placed by dynamicduodebaters 2 years ago
dynamicduodebaters
cheyennebodieAlternativeDavidTied
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: copyed and pasted arguments
Vote Placed by dexterbeagle 2 years ago
dexterbeagle
cheyennebodieAlternativeDavidTied
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 provided clear rebuttals that were backed up with sources. Pro did not provide sources or rebut the major counter arguments of con. Moreover, while I usually leave spelling and grammar a tie, I am giving those point to Pro due to sentences like the one that begins, "The only thing that will stop a bag guy..."
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 2 years ago
9spaceking
cheyennebodieAlternativeDavidTied
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: pro just repeats what she says and never refutes con