The Instigator
cheyennebodie
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
wxyz2000
Con (against)
Winning
17 Points

republic is far better than a democracy.

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 3 votes the winner is...
wxyz2000
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/1/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 947 times Debate No: 61145
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (11)
Votes (3)

 

cheyennebodie

Pro

Rebublic:Rule of law. Of course the law that has best served America was Judeo-Christian law, or summed up, the ten commandment.Except for the first two, these laws would best serve all people.As in any constitution, where law comes from will dictate the freedoms it experiences and the prosperity and success of its people. Democracy on the other hand is simply rule by the majority. Which could be easily end up with mob rule. A moral majority would keep things in check. But it would not be long before they would be undermined by clever politicians. Immorality would be rampant and the immoral majority would dictate to the rest of the people.
wxyz2000

Con


Since my opponent has jumped straight into the debate, I will do so too. Before I begin, I would like to point that the burden of proof is on my opponent.



I will debate this from a philosophical point of view.



People’s opinion of what is right or wrong change. In the past, people once believed that men were superior to women, that certain races were superior to others. These beliefs - in our age- are considered wrong.



Humans are not perfect - our decisions are prone to error. Our laws are set according to our beliefs, which fluctuate and change over time. Thus a law that made sense in the past may not make sense today. Consider Barack Obama’s efforts at reforming the educational system. Because the American Constitution left the decision-making power in the hands of the state, President Obama could not reform our educational system, no matter how badly it needed to change.



The link below gives you an list of problems with the American Constitution.



http://rationalwiki.org...



While not all of these pointers may be correct, it does point to show that the precedented changes which has marked our era have outpaced our constitution. The laws of the republic cannot foresee what we would need in another century.



Another example is the constitution of the Roman Republic.



http://en.wikipedia.org...



As the source suggests, the fatal weakness in the constitution of the Roman Republic was that “it was the army, and not the senate, which dictated the fortune of the state”. This led to the rise of dictators such as Sulla, Marius, Caesar, and the eventual rise of the Roman empire. If the power was invested in the people and not the law, these transformations would not have happened.



Republics may not be stable



Between 1792-1958 there were five French republics in succession. The revolts within the Roman republic suggests this as well. America descended into civil war because the constitution guaranteed state rights. These state rights would give the southern states enough power to secede. In seventy years, the Spanish had two republics, the second of which fell when Francisco Franco became dictator.



Man is flexible, laws are not



Let’s take a look at the Declaration of the Rights of Man and of the Citizen.



10. No one shall be disquieted on account of his opinions, including his religious views, provided that their manifestation does not disturb the public order established by law…


17. Since property is an inviolable and sacred right, no one shall be deprived thereof except where public necessity, legally determined, shall clearly demand it…


There are evidently loopholes in these laws (italicized). Loopholes will most likely be found in any constitution (Men are not perfect). These loopholes would allow people with power to gain strength over the Republic. This would not happen if it were a democracy.



Con points out that the immoral majority would dictate to the rest of the people



In that case the “immoral majority” will be the ones moral and the “moral minority” will be the ones immoral. For instance, religious intolerance and imperialism (which was a necessary process in spreading the “true” religion) were considered “moral” in few centuries past, and today they are considered “immoral” by the majority of the people.



Con points out that democracy will inevitably descend into mob rule



The majority of today’s democracies are in fact republic. America and Greece, which seem to be most prone to fall into mob rule, are in fact republics.




My opponent will probably debate this from a theological point of view, so I will to (even though i dislike doing so). My opponent would probably like to establish that the words of God are perfect and should be strictly adhered to, thus creating a perfect “republic”.



Firstly, I would like to establish that while the ten commandments are fairly straightforward and universally acceptable, they are not enough to govern today’s society. The ones that may be arguably related to law are listed below.



“Honor your father and your mother…”



“You shall not murder.



“You shall not commit adultery.



“You shall not steal.



“You shall not give false testimony against your neighbor.”



“You shall not covet your neighbor’s house. You shall not covet your neighbor’s wife, or his male or female servant, his ox or donkey, or anything that belongs to your neighbor.”



You can see that many things are not covered. An example would be copyright infringement. I doubt anti-plagiarism laws were needed 2000 years ago. Similarly, gun laws did not exist back then. In the end, man must create laws for himself, which leads to problems I established previously.



Another problem is that while God’s words may be true, man may misinterpret God’s words. Christians felt compelled to venture out on crusades. The Church threatened Galileo when he declared that the Earth revolved around the sun.



The final and most obvious problem is that in a culturally diverse global village (especially in a multi-ethnic society like America), it is impossible to adhere to the words of a certain religion. I doubt my opponent would wish to follow the words of the Koran. Even Roman Catholics, Jews, and Protestants have different interpretations of the ten commandment. In a simple example, traditional Jewish people view “thou shalt not steal” as the theft of an actual person (kidnapping), while others view it as property. There are long lists of differences on the following page, i will not enumerate them (Click on the ten commandments, which are hyperlinks. You will see New Testament interpretations, Roman Catholic interpretations, etc).



http://en.wikipedia.org...



Debate Round No. 1
cheyennebodie

Pro

cheyennebodie forfeited this round.
wxyz2000

Con

I extend my arguments as I have refuted each of Pro's arguments. Pro has not given any reason of why a republic is "far better" than a democracy.
Debate Round No. 2
cheyennebodie

Pro

cheyennebodie forfeited this round.
wxyz2000

Con

I have proven that a republic is not "far better" than a republic. Laws may be erroneous, and dependence on the law will cause instability. While democracy may fall into mob rule, republics will too, as proven again and again by history. Ultimately let us not let laws define us, but rather use it as a tool for improving our quality of life.

Vote for con!
Debate Round No. 3
11 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by wxyz2000 3 years ago
wxyz2000
@GoOrDin

Technically, we are a republic
Posted by GoOrDin 3 years ago
GoOrDin
I am Pro republic.
not because any functioning or practiced republic is ideal, but because truthfully,
a democracy will not work. we are in social decline right now, and the democratic system that has been established makes it nearly impossible to regain control.

improving democracy when it has declined is dangerous,
improving republic when it is declining gives it even more strength.

worldly governments are ridiculous.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
couldn't find it. Tell me where it is.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
Sure. All I have to do is find it. Still new here.
Posted by Bill-Rabara 3 years ago
Bill-Rabara
Cheyenne,

Are you going to post your acceptance in the first round of the god is evil debate?
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
Can't figure out how to make the adjustment. Tried to change the format, but didn't happen.Sorry, I am computer challenged.
Posted by Bill-Rabara 3 years ago
Bill-Rabara
'Better' is a unclear, subjective term that can mean different things to different people. Re-word the topic to say 'Republic brings much more freedom and prosperity than democracy' and I might accept.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
Better means exactly what it says.A republic based on our constitution will always bring more freedom and prosperity than a democracy ever could.Because it has stability built in it. Rule of law. Confidence in rule of law lets people know where they stand. Mob rule never could do that.That is why that woman got a judgment against mcdonalds because she spilled hot coffee on her. Those jurers had to have been on drugs to award her that. That is a perfect example of mob rule. Mcdonalds was not protected from that insane verdict.Because, and only because they had deep pockets.This country is no longer a republic, but a socialist democracy.That is why contracts are signed not knowing if some weazle lawyer can twist the constitution to overturn it. Instability is always the outcome of a democracy.
Posted by Bill-Rabara 3 years ago
Bill-Rabara
You are correct, I meant 'better'.
Posted by cheyennebodie 3 years ago
cheyennebodie
Where did you see the term " good" in my post?
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by Alduin 3 years ago
Alduin
cheyennebodiewxyz2000Tied
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: FF
Vote Placed by Atheist-Independent 3 years ago
Atheist-Independent
cheyennebodiewxyz2000Tied
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 Checkmark1 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: Full forfeiture.
Vote Placed by kasmic 3 years ago
kasmic
cheyennebodiewxyz2000Tied
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: FF