The Instigator
lowtruedrew
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Yassine
Con (against)
Winning
10 Points

should zoos be banned?

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...
Yassine
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 4/28/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,898 times Debate No: 74359
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (2)

 

lowtruedrew

Pro

Do you think zoos should be banned?
Yassine

Con

I thank Pro for instigating this debate & I accept the challenge.



Resolution:


- Zoo: a facility in which animals are confined within enclosures, displayed to the public, and in which they may also be bred [*].

- Ban: officially or legally prohibit [**].



BOP:


- The burden of proof is shared, as per the format of the resolution.



[*] Wikipedia.

[**] Google Dictionary.



Best of luck.

Debate Round No. 1
lowtruedrew

Pro

lowtruedrew forfeited this round.
Yassine

Con


- Due to limitations in time, I’ll postpone my case till next round. Sorry :)


Debate Round No. 2
lowtruedrew

Pro

lowtruedrew forfeited this round.
Yassine

Con

Preface:

- Pro has provided no arguments or sources for his case, & forfeited most of it. Thus warranting him a penalty in all conduct, arguments & sources.



Case:


1. The Zoo, like any other institution, is overall good, though liable to be bad at times. & considering the good the Zoo brings to the human society & environment (namely, conservation, protection of animals, preservation of endangered species, animal research, education, entertainment. . .), it should not be tossed because it has some bad elements. The same way a government should not tossed because it has some bad human/material elements!


2. I’ll make my case with one instance of good brought by the Zoo. For instance, the British and Irish Association of Zoos and Aquariums presents a number of species fighting extinction with the help of the Zoo, “from hundreds of zoo-backed conservation programmes, focusing on species at high risk of extinction or extinct in the wild” [*], here is a humble list of some of these poor species facing extinction [*]:


> The blue-crowned laughing thrush: (such beauty & serenity)



> The white-clawed crayfish: (what a surviver! A warrior!)



> The Amur leopards: (such majesty can not be overlooked)



> The potosi pupfish: (such an innocently dumb fish, no discimination!).



> The partula snails: (snails & such)



> The blue-eyed black lemur: (is it scared or is it scary!?)



> The ploughshare tortoise: (such infinite wisdom!)



3. Preservation of nature is an important aspect of human development, & a duty on mankind, both morally & pragmatically, for our survival as a species & as moral civilised human beings. Therefore, caring for animals, & protecting them from going extinct, as part of the initiative to preserve the Environment, is equally important, & enjoined on mankind.



Conclusion:


- Zoos should not be banned, for this would contradict what Morality, & thus Law, is based on.


- Also, Pro has clearly completely failed in carrying his BOP.


=> Vote Con.



Sources:


[*] http://www.theguardian.com...
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 1 year ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
Thanks. :p

Good luck
Posted by Yassine 1 year ago
Yassine
- Sorry, :P . Good luck next time ;) .
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 1 year ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
YASSINE i WAS GONNA ACCEPT THIS T_T.
Posted by The-Voice-of-Truth 1 year ago
The-Voice-of-Truth
What is your stance on this issue?
2 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Vote Placed by lannan13 1 year ago
lannan13
lowtruedrewYassineTied
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 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: Pro failed to argue. Forfeiture
Vote Placed by Kozu 1 year ago
Kozu
lowtruedrewYassineTied
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: Con FF'ed all his rounds, costing him conduct points. Incidentally that means he also made no arguments while Con has, giving argument points to Con by default, though Con's points on Zoo's preserving animals from going extinct which in turn benefits humans bolsters my decision.