The Instigator
nathanw2002
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points
The Contender
hcd1997
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points

should dating under 18 be illegal?

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 2 votes the winner is...
nathanw2002
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/22/2016 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 451 times Debate No: 85410
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

nathanw2002

Con

Should dating under 18 be illegal?
hcd1997

Pro

I think that it shouldn't be illegal because what are under age relationships are more important so we can point out our mistakes
Debate Round No. 1
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: 9spaceking// Mod action: NOT Removed<

3 points to Con (Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: pro accidentally wrote arguments for con.

[*Reason for non-removal*] Pro did, indeed, argue for the wrong side.
************************************************************************
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
@8bit-chess
1. Blurry as my asscrack. Regardless the line remains and is not stipulable. We are discussing a theoretical clause and so the parameters have been set; Dating, not hanging out. Get your head out of your arse. This is a debate.
2. Fawk the constitution.
3. umm. read again.
Posted by GoOrDin 1 year ago
GoOrDin
Yes. Immature men are too inconsiderate to take ambition into perspective and actually work it intot heir social lives. They do not have enough real world experience to think.

Through promoting immature men, women inadvertently glorify unfaithfulness because those relationships crap out all the time.

If a guy gets a hot girl, he thinks he has no need to be faithful, because of the relationship craps out, then he can still get another girl without improving, and blame the girl for its failure.. there is so much to this debate.

Men grow up to be criminals, perverts, lazy, inconsiderate etc.. school is filled with immature people who grow up to fail - regularly. these immature relationships advocate that event, by glorifying the less dignified courses of action.

women grow up to be homeless drug addicts plenty after this, or they fawk/sponsor corrupt politicians and criminals to house themselves.

The sex trade is factually dangerous - and women who are "Spun", depressed, hopeless, desolate and distraught are more likely to be abused.

Social inequality from sexual behaviour leads to school shootings. Enmity goes deep, far and has huge impacts on national mentality, behaviour and conflicts (even your mean boss/shitty employees who don't want to work because they think they are entitled to better conditions [and want Boss premiums, {because, "Boss's don't work hard" (which they DO. for fawks sakes. no one else on the job site is even qualified to do what the boss does.)}]).

SO. NO. 18 and under relationships should be Banned internationally. and parents who accommodate it should be fined large sums.

Amen. science is the Word of God.
Posted by 8bit-chess 1 year ago
8bit-chess
1.The line between dating and hanging out is very blurry if it's there at all.
2.There would be no way at ALL to enforce the law without violating the constitution if it were illigal.
3. There is no reason at all for it to be illegal.
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by 9spaceking 1 year ago
9spaceking
nathanw2002hcd1997Tied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: pro accidentally wrote arguments for con.
Vote Placed by EAT_IT_SUKA 1 year ago
EAT_IT_SUKA
nathanw2002hcd1997Tied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:00 
Reasons for voting decision: Both sides had acceptable conduct. CON made capitalization errors in the resolution, while PRO's sentence was all over the place. CON made no arguments while PRO made arguments for the other side. No sources were used. What kind of debate is this?