we all agree
Debate Rounds (5)
Until then I'm not quite sure what I'm debating about, so I'll just sort of use this as an acceptance type round
some one only has no food if we dont give him no food
And the double negatives are throwing me off, because I'm sure you said that "a person doesn't have food if we give him food."
if we dont give him food
One cannot steal food if no food exists.
I'm still not sure what that means. If you don't have food you should go to the grocery store and buy more like normal people. There's no reason to steal.
As for the rules of nature, my opponent still hasn't given a list of rules.
So far all I can do is continue to explain how his analogy is nonsensical and keep asking for a definition of the rules of nature. I have literally no ground to debate on because the resolution is not defined at all.
Perfectly reasonable. Well I'm not sure how that supports your case, so I guess carry on my arguments.
Since the resolution can't be affirmed, I ask you to throw in a vote for the negative.
Thank you for reading.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by SolonKR 1 year 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||5|
Reasons for voting decision: Pro has the burden of proof, as the resolution is stating that something should happen. He provides no evidence to support this, nor clarity regarding what his actual claim is. Con at least made attempts to rebut Pro's points, like the food example in round two, so arguments to con. As Pro's grammar egregiously affected the debate, and as he levied a personal attack in round 4, S&G and Conduct to Con. No sources, so I'm withholding that vote.
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.