http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=1&sort=&member=ToastOfDestiny Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/ en-us 2013-05-19T14:38:05-08:00 2013-05-19T14:38:05-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/LD-international-Court-Resolution/1/ (Voting Period) The Resolution box will not allow for the whole resolution so here it is: Resolved: The United States ought to submit to the jurisdiction of an international court designed to prosecute crimes against humanity. This is the Jan/Feb LD topic so I would appreciate it if my opponent was familiar with LD and debated accordingly -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- "America now stands as the world's foremost power. We should be proud: Not since the age of the Romans has one people achieved such preeminence. But we are not Romans; we do not seek an empire. We are Americans, trustees of a vision and a heritage that commits us to the values of democracy and the universal cause of human rights." Because I agree with Senator John Kerry I Must Affirm the Resolution, Resolved: The United States ought to submit to the jurisdiction of an international court designed to prosecute crimes against humanit http://www.debate.org/debates/LD-international-Court-Resolution/1/comments/ 2009-01-07T16:30:05-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Laws-of-Mathematics-are-Unchangeable/1/ (Post Voting Period) I'll start with a definition: Mathematics: the science of numbers and their operations, interrelations, combinations, generalizations, and abstractions and of space configurations and their structure, measurement, transformations, and generalizations http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/mathematics My argument is that as long as the symbols and functions of math do not have their meanings changes, the laws of mathematics are unchangeable, no matter what you try to prove. http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Laws-of-Mathematics-are-Unchangeable/1/comments/ 2009-04-19T19:00:36-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-Logical-Master-vs-ToastofDestiny/1/ (Voting Period) Greetings to my opponent and many thanks to the one who is hosting the tournament as well as those who are taking the time to judge. With formalities out of the way, let us proceed. Since I think character introductions are a big waste of space, I'm just going to link you to my livejournal page where you'll find a detailed character introduction for my team: http://dr-logic.livejournal.com/ I'll post my actual arguments here. ARGUMENTS: ----Zero time: The instant the fight begins------ The very second the battle starts, Sora uses the teleportation properties of his warp snipe to home in on Jean Grey's location and kill her in one blow. As noted already, we've seen Sora strong enough to slice a magically constructed/enforced skyscraper in half like butter. Using such power on someone with normal human physical resistance would guarantee death. Not to mention that Jean Grey is most certainly not fast enough to counter someone who has shown him http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-Logical-Master-vs-ToastofDestiny/1/comments/ 2009-08-29T15:54:50-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/High-School-Students-Ought-Not-Be-Required-to-Take-Exit-Exams/1/ (Post Voting Period) First I Would like to thank my opponent without him this debate would not be possible. Second i would like to restate the resolution that High School Students Ought Not Be Required to Take Exit Exams Which i would define as High School Students Ought not (ought not meaning that they should not have to)Be Required(be required meaning be forced to) Take Exit Exams( As in The tests you must take to graduate) There are three main topics i would like to discuss during this debate First Being the social standpoint, Second being the economical standpoint, And third being the moral standpoint. My first topic is the social standpoint is followed by two sub-points the first being that with more people graduating from high school sooner we will have a stronger community. My second sub-point is that with more people going on to higher education we can finally be back on top of the world power. Second is my economical stand point once more people go to college t http://www.debate.org/debates/High-School-Students-Ought-Not-Be-Required-to-Take-Exit-Exams/1/comments/ 2009-11-16T14:56:13-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/One-could-logically-follow-a-majority-of-these-guidelines/1/ (Post Voting Period) Resolved: that of the 8 guidelines for safety found here: http://www.theonion.com/content/node/27460 one could logically justify adhering to a majority (5+) of these with the intent of preserving health and safety. Do not continue on without reading the above link. It won't take more than 1 minute. RULES 1. I do not want semantics in regards to the resolution. If I have poorly laid out what this debate is to be about, address it in 'comments' or briefly in your argument. I do not want a debate about how I worded the topic. Feel free, however to debate the proper interpretation of each of the given guidelines. 2. I win if I prove that a person could logically decide to adhere to 5 or more of the given guidelines with the intent of safety. My opponent wins if he can prove that 4 or more of the given guidelines are not logical in promoting safety. With that in mind, my opponent could lose (or simply ignore) arguments on 4 of the guidelines and still wi http://www.debate.org/debates/One-could-logically-follow-a-majority-of-these-guidelines/1/comments/ 2009-10-26T16:19:28-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/the-culinary-institute-of-america-is-the-best-culinary-school-in-the-world/1/ (Post Voting Period) the culinary institute of america is the best culinary school in the world... i guess it is not fair... can't argue fact http://www.debate.org/debates/the-culinary-institute-of-america-is-the-best-culinary-school-in-the-world/1/comments/ 2009-09-02T19:41:02-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Christian-God-is-Omniscient-and-Omnibenevolent/1/ (Voting Period) Alright, I'll open this up to Pro to make the first argument. If you'd like me to argue first, just post in the comments, and I can put up my side. Please, let's not get semantical. Definitions: Omniscient (www.dictionary.com): having complete or unlimited knowledge, awareness, or understanding; perceiving all things. Omnibenevolence (my own): always making the ethical, or morally correct, decision. To clarify 'morally correct', a decision will be considered immoral if it causes harm. If you have a better definition of omnibenevolence (I couldn't find it in a dictionary. It's also coming up on spellcheck), please post it. http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Christian-God-is-Omniscient-and-Omnibenevolent/1/comments/ 2009-07-09T16:51:26-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-U.S.-Government-Ought-Not-Sell-the-UnaBombers-Possessions/1/ (Post Voting Period) http://www.cnn.com/2009/CRIME/06/09/unabomber.evidence/index.html Resolved: The U.S. Government ought not to sell the Unabomber's possessions without permission from the Unabomber. I just saw this on CNN and was wondering if anyone would like a friendly debate on the subject. Be forewarned, this debate isn't about semantics or legal precedent. I'm looking for a debate on morals - basically: should the government be able to sell a criminal's possessions without permission? If either side makes arguments concerning legal precedent/semantics those arguments are to be discarded. Con can post arguments in R1, or we can both wait until R2; it doesn't matter to me. With all of that said, let the debate begin! http://www.debate.org/debates/The-U.S.-Government-Ought-Not-Sell-the-UnaBombers-Possessions/1/comments/ 2009-06-19T21:31:21-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/It-is-impossible-to-prove-the-existence-of-God./1/ (Post Voting Period) I created this topic to say that I am fed up with people telling me to prove the existence of God. God can't be proven because he is infinite and if he could be empirically proven the required faith to be saved by him would be completely irrelevant. God would most likely not randomly place proof of his existence on Earth. He gives us free will and choices and if we could prove him, all of the sudden people would join not necessarily because they want to but because they know Christianity is the right religion. That would undermine free will hence, God would not want that. http://www.debate.org/debates/It-is-impossible-to-prove-the-existence-of-God./1/comments/ 2009-05-01T16:51:20-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Intelligent-Design-should-be-taught-as-an-alternative-theory-to-Evolution./1/ (Voting Period) ======== Introduction ======== Darwin's Theory of Evolution is not the only theory out there to explain the diversity of life. Intelligent Design is a viable alternative. Definitions Theory of Intelligent Design: "The theory of intelligent design holds that certain features of the universe and of living things are best explained by an intelligent cause, not an undirected process such as natural selection." (intelligentdesign.org) Evolution: "The gradual process by which the present diversity of plant and animal life arose from the earliest and most primitive organisms..." (talkorigins.org, as cited from Oxford Concise Science Dictionary) ======== Contention 1: Education is Public ======== A 2005 poll by Harris Interactive showed that 54% of U.S. adults "do not think human beings developed from an earlier species." Intelligent Design is therefore the theory that represents the viewpoint of the majority of the United States. Education is public http://www.debate.org/debates/Intelligent-Design-should-be-taught-as-an-alternative-theory-to-Evolution./1/comments/ 2009-04-27T20:17:15-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Neither-Debater-Shall-Break-a-Rule/1/ (Post Voting Period) I'm just following the trend - these look fun! 0. By accepting this debate, my opponent agrees to all the rules already posted. 1. Rules created hold power over all rules posted later, and no later rule can contradict an earlier rule. 2. Both players should still have the ability to post rules in their turn. 3. A violation of a rule that is not null and void will result in the rule-breaker losing this debate. 4. With the exception of my first round, a player may only do something besides make rules to discuss whether one has broken a rule, or whether a rule is null. 5. Not counting these foundation rules, each player can only create 3 rules per turn. 6. Each player must produce 3 rules per round or they forfeit. 7. Rules cannot result in an auto-win. Breaking a rule cannot result in the victory of the rule-breaker. Each player should have an opportunity to not break each rule. 8. A voter must default all categories to the victor of th http://www.debate.org/debates/Neither-Debater-Shall-Break-a-Rule/1/comments/ 2009-06-10T20:20:02-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Omnipotency-is-possible/1/ (Voting Period) Omnipotent, having unlimited power or authority. http://www.answers.com/omnipotent I interpret this as being able to do everything, I don't want to debate the definition, but if you have a problem with it, mention it in the first round. I say omnipotency is impossible, you say it does. It's as simple as that, let's do this. http://www.debate.org/debates/Omnipotency-is-possible/1/comments/ 2009-09-30T19:12:52-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-R1-ToastOfDestiny-vs.-rougeagent21/1/ (Voting Period) I'm creating this debate with five rounds because I am going to be away from the computer from July 25th to the 27th. If it is my turn to argue during this period, I will have to forfeit, and ask rouge not to argue. The debate will continue in the next round as normal. If I do not miss a round, neither of us shall argue in R5. So begins the L-M Classic! Let's have a good one, rouge! Rules: http://www.debate.org/forums/debate.org/topic/1972/ I shall begin by explaining my team, and then my strategy. 1) Kabaji (Prince of Tennis) - Streetlevel Kabaji is a 7th grade tennis player with the ability to copy any technique shown to him, given time. For instance, he copies the Tezuka Zone and Zero-Shiki Drop Shot immediately. Both are regarded as high-level techniques. The only technique it has taken longer to copy is Hyakuren Jitoku no Kiwami, a technique so difficult to master that only two other characters in the entire series ever use it, which he copies http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-R1-ToastOfDestiny-vs.-rougeagent21/1/comments/ 2009-08-08T08:46:24-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/I-will-not-contradict-myself/6/ (Voting Period) Contradiction: http://en.wikipedia.org...... Rules: 1. In Rounds 1-3, CON will ask PRO ten Yes/No questions. 2. In Rounds 2-4, PRO will answer all of CON's questions with yes, no, or an explanation as to why neither is correct or accurate. 3. In Rounds 2-4, CON can point out any contradictions that he or she believes to be present in PRO's answers. 4. When CON points out a contradiction, PRO may use all of the following rounds to defend the accused contradiction until either CON drops the accusation or PRO admits defeat, or when the debate is over. 5. If CON ever fails to ask PRO exactly ten Yes/No questions when necessary, CON automatically loses. 6. If PRO ever fails to answer every question asked in the previous round by the rules, PRO automatically loses. 7. If PRO is never found to have contradicted himself in this debate, PRO wins. 8. If PRO is ever found to have contradicted himself in this debate, PRO loses. 9. Because sources are largely ir http://www.debate.org/debates/I-will-not-contradict-myself/6/comments/ 2009-07-18T17:08:32-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Bruce-Schneier-Facts-Contest/1/ (Voting Period) Each person may post up to five Bruce Schneier facts per round. Posting more than five results in a forfeit. This debate is similar to http://www.debate.org/debates/Funny-Joke-Contest/1/ All voting categories are to be defaulted to the one with the funniest and most clever jokes. Since these jokes are inherently math- and science-centric, cleverness is just as important as funniness. Also, because I am just mean, no jokes are to be explained. *** 1. Bruce Schneier once factored a prime number. 2. There are no composite numbers. Only prime numbers Bruce has broken into smaller pieces. 3. If at first you don't succeed at breaking a cipher, you're not Bruce Schneier. 4. Bruce Schneier shaves with Occam's Razor. 5. Bruce Schneier once broke AES using nothing but six feet of rusty barbed wire, a toothpick, and the front axle from a 1962 Ford Falcon. *** Good luck and have fun! http://www.debate.org/debates/Bruce-Schneier-Facts-Contest/1/comments/ 2009-07-06T14:06:34-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Both-debaters-must-follow-the-rules./1/ (Voting Period) 1. By accepting this debate, my opponent agrees to all the rulse already posted. By voting on this debate, voters accept the foundation rules that apply to them. 2. Rules created hold power over all rules posted later, and no later rule can contradict an earlier rule. 3. Both players should still have the ability to post rules in their turn. 4. A player may only do something besides make rules to discuss whether one has broken a rule, or whether a rule is null. 5. Not counting these foundation rules, each player can only create 3 rules per turn. 6. Each player must produce 3 rules per round or they forfeit. 7. Rules cannnot result in an auto-win. Breaking a rule cannot result in the victory of the rule-breaker. Each player should have an oppportunity to not break each rule. 8. A voter must default all categories to the victor of the debate. 9. The victor of this debate is the one who has committed the fewest infractions of the rules. http://www.debate.org/debates/Both-debaters-must-follow-the-rules./1/comments/ 2009-08-28T14:15:13-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/why/1/ (Post Voting Period) Why? http://www.debate.org/debates/why/1/comments/ 2009-05-29T20:55:50-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/You-should-not-be-allowed-to-vote-on-a-debate-that-you-participated-in./1/ (Post Voting Period) Observation 1: I have the burdon of clash, my opponent has the burdon of proof. Prove it. Observation 2: In no way will the participate be allowed to vote or influence voters with propaganda, just factual information. I will now begin. Contention 1: Participants being allowed to vote retains the possibility of biased decisions. The entire debate outcome is therefore jeprodized and subject to pointless arguementations; it means nothing if there is no truth in a vote. I do not believe that every case is unbiased, and if there is just one biased case, then I have proven my point. Contention 2: Judging is perceptive. Of course the Aff/Neg is usually going to believe that they have won. Allowing them to vote will open up the possibilty of biased votes. Besides, I don't have a texting plan, so I can't couter act a biased vote by being able to vote myself. I will rest my arguement. I will try to finish this debate as fast as possible. http://www.debate.org/debates/You-should-not-be-allowed-to-vote-on-a-debate-that-you-participated-in./1/comments/ 2009-06-14T14:39:18-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Avatar-is-an-amazing-film/1/ (Voting Period) Although the cg of avatar was good, the movie contained within it atrocious logic and realism problems. Let me point out some examples: 1. Floating mountains are completely absurd 2. Runoff was coming off the floating mountains even tough there was clearly no ice or snow on top 3. In the final battle, the humans are retarded enough to fly through a canyon at like 25 mph when they could easily fly over the mountains and not be ambushed. Also the jet could fly a very high altitude and drop the bomb before the na'vi knew what hit them. Better yet, the space ship floating in orbit could drop a bomb or kinetic weapon from orbit. 4. Kevlar doesn't protect from arrows? The arrow is more blunt and is traveling slower than a bullet. Yet the Kevlar does nothing and the soldier is killed instantly. 5. The soldiers had sophisticated radar and could see the na'vi coming through the forest for some distance. If the soldiers had just blind fired into the forest http://www.debate.org/debates/Avatar-is-an-amazing-film/1/comments/ 2010-01-21T15:05:33-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Public-High-School-Students-In-The-United-States-Ought-Not-Be-Required-To-Pass-SEEs-To-Graduate/1/ (Post Voting Period) I would like to Debate Lincoln Douglas style, taking the Negative position. Please, no nat circut cases. :) My opponent as the Affirmative will begin. http://www.debate.org/debates/Public-High-School-Students-In-The-United-States-Ought-Not-Be-Required-To-Pass-SEEs-To-Graduate/1/comments/ 2009-11-22T01:09:15-08:00