Debate.org: drafterman's Debates

Gay Marriage.

2012-12-07T11:16:50-08:00

(Post Voting Period) (Using my same standpoints as all are valid and relevant.) Separation of Church and State works both ways, therefore on legal grounds? This issue should be locked away indefinitely. Gays bring up the "fact" that it is a "Civil Rights" issue. First off, marriage was created by straights. As a patent owner, do you not have rights to said patent? As the creators of marriage, do we not have the right to reserve it? Do you have any idea how many issues this causes? So if I had a birthday party, and I only invited Joe, John, and Susie, should I be vilified and legally punished/rendered irrelevant because somebody whined a little too loud? The action of allowing Gay Marriage has the cataclysmic effect of giving a spoiled child a toy. It will cause reverse discrimination, and destroy traditional marriage. The argument is "Well, they should be able to be with who they love, no one is forcing you to do it, so it doesn't cause any harm." Oh, so if being discriminat

The cosmological argument from contingency is sound

2012-03-15T13:11:10-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

===Resolution and BOP===

Pro will argue for the soundness of the cosmological argument from contingency, whereas Con will attempt to show why the argument is either invalid or not sound. The burden of proof will be on Pro to establish and defend a positive argument for the soundness of the argument while Con must only show why Pro's argument is false.

===Definitions===

God will be defined as a necessary being or agent, one that depends on nothing but itself for it's existence.

An argument is valid when its premises logically necessitate it's conclusion. An argument is sound when it is valid and when all of its premises are true.

The cosmological argument from contingency (CAC) is as follows:

1: Every contingent fact has an explanation.
2: There is a contingent fact that includes all other contingent facts.
3: Therefore, there is an explanation for

Patriotism is a virtue

2012-01-03T07:53:53-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

As Con, I will argue against the proposition that patriotism is a virtue. Pro must agree with the following definitions that will frame the debate:

Patriotism (noun): "Love of and devotion to one's country." [1]

Virtue (noun): "An example or kind of moral excellence." (emphasis added) [2]

I want to emphasize that I intend for this to be a philosophical debate over the normative merits of patriotism. In other words, it will not be enough for Pro to defend patriotism as a necessary evil or a useful tool for promoting other goals; Pro must argue that patriotism itself is morally praiseworthy. As the vast majority of Americans simply take this for granted, I don't think the terms of this debate are too demanding for Pro to accept.

Round 1 is for acceptance only. I look forward to debating an intelligent, patriotic opponent!

[1] I thank my opponent TUF for taking part of Famer's story writing debating tournament. This is the second round of Famer's knock-out tournament. Both debaters must create a story together. Whoever creates the most interesting continuation/orientation/conclusion of the story wins the vote for "most convincing arguments"

Rules of this debate:

8000 characters maximum
72 hours for time to argue
7 days voting period
Yes to voting comments

Points for spelling and grammar are awarded as per usual.

There will be no points awarded for sources.

However, as the rules of the tournament goes, if any of the debaters forfeits a round (unless both forfeits an equals number of times), they will, by default automatically lose all 7 points as a result.

Good Luck!"

==== Monday ====
---- 11:40 ----

From the outside, the garage looks like any y

Pascals Wager is not a logic fallacy

2012-05-17T08:41:27-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

Pascals wager in short for this debate can be summarized as:

"God is, or He is not"
A Game is being played... where heads or tails will turn up.
According to reason, you can defend neither of the propositions.
You must wager. (It's not optional.)
Let us weigh the gain and the loss in wagering that God is. Let us estimate these two chances. If you gain, you gain all; if you lose, you lose nothing.
Wager, then, without hesitation that He is. (...) There is here an infinity of an infinitely happy life to gain, a chance of gain against a finite number of chances of loss, and what you stake is finite. And so our proposition is of infinite force, when there is the finite to stake in a game where there are equal risks of gain and of loss, and the infinite to gain.

and a link to it can be found here http://en.wikipedia.org/

Human Personhood Begins at and by Human Conception (fertilization)

2012-12-26T19:39:52-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

This debate will focus on the (U.S.) LEGAL requirements for personhood.

I am taking the PRO side of the debate as I will argue that our laws should and to some extent already do recognize the fact that human 'personhood' begins at conception. My opponent will be taking the position of Con and will try to argue that personhood does not and or should not begin at conception.

This debate is significant in that our Constitution under the 'equal protections' clause of the 14th Amendment is by way of it's own wording, an inclusive establishment.

"... nor shall any state deprive ANY person of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor deny to ANY person within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws." ~ 14t

P1: All Time is of the Essence; P2: All Essence Precedes Existence; C: All Existence Precedes Time

2012-08-03T05:31:51-08:00

(Post Voting Period) I am arguing that the below argument and the equivalent title make up a valid syllogism. Premise 1: all Space-Time is of the Essence (timing and meeting all the deadlines are essential and required for the end is near) Premise 2: all Essence Precedes Existence (before something can exist it must exist in the mind of a creator) Conclusion: all Existence precedes Space-Time (the mind of a creator precedes the universe) Let's have at it! REFERENCES: 1. Time is of the Essence: http://idioms.thefreedictionary.com/Time+is+of+the+essence 2. Essence Precedes Existence: http://faculty.smu.edu/jkazez/mol09/Sartre%20Handout.htm

Theoretically the past will exactly repeat itself.

2011-11-21T07:56:33-08:00

(Post Voting Period) So basically my position is that some time in the future we will all live these lifes again without a single change. So for example in the future I will be sitting at this computer typing the exact same thing on the exact same day with not a single difference (except for the fact that time has elapsed). I will let my opponent first accept the challenge and then I will make my argument.

The Multiverse Theory Supports Creationism's Young Age Hypothesis

2012-05-03T08:05:48-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

Introduction

Though not a young earth creationist myself, I recently found some irony with regard to both the Many Worlds Hypothesis (MWH hereafter) compared to Young Earth Creationism (YEC hereafter).

The Many Worlds Hypothesis

MWH employs a world ensemble of real universes so that vast possibilities are actualized; like laws with values necessary for life. In order for MWH to work theorists needed to propose a mechanism for generating so many realities, and inflationary cosmology provided the best shot at a good mechanism. Inflationary cosmology, the mechanism, often contends that our universe is but a small "pocket" within a much larger multiverse. At the heart of the mu

Governments must act more decisively to stop the spread of AIDS

2011-10-12T08:34:08-08:00

(Post Voting Period) When people used to contract a contagious disease for which there is no cure, such as leprosy, they were isolated from the rest of society in order to prevent that disease from spreading. Thankfully, these days, leprosy can be easily treated (1) which is why sufferers are no longer confined to leper colonies. But what about people with HIV/AIDS? There is still no cure for this fatal disease yet people infected with HIV are allowed to roam the streets without let or hindrance. As a result of the total lack of restrictions on HIV-carriers' movements 25 million people worldwide - including many children - have contracted HIV and died. (2) Obviously, this uncontrolled spread of AIDS cannot be allowed to continue any longer and HIV-positive people must be rounded up and herded into AIDS colonies without undue delay, but this policy presents two obvious questions: 1 - Where will these colonies be located? 2 - Who will be responsible for running them? To

Resolved: In the game "Mafia," the Town should abide by the Policy, "Lynch All Liars"

2012-01-22T12:46:26-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

I'd like to thank F-16 for accepting this challenge and for suggesting the idea of debating Mafia theories and practices.

Resolution: In the game "Mafia," the Town should abide by the Policy, "Lynch All Liars."

Definitions:
Mafia - common party game that pits an uninformed majority against an informed minority (for those not in the know).
Town - the uninformed majority
Lynch All Liars - A policy in which, when a player has been caught in a lie, the Town, in response, should lynch them, removing them from the game. Lynch All Liars is commonly abbreviated as: LAL.

Round 1: Acceptance only
Round 4: No new arguments

Pro (me) will defend the resolution. Pro has burden of proof.
Con (F-16) must refute Pro's arguments or demonstrate that a burden of proof has not been met.

Voting period: 2 w

Atheism is the only reasonable, default position to take.

2011-10-08T11:10:54-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

Resolved: Atheism is the only reasonable default position.

Preliminary Definitions:
Atheism - lacking a positive belief in a god or gods (irrespective as to whether or not there is a positive belief in a no god or gods).

Default position - the position to take, with regards to belief, prior to the inclusion of evidence or argument, either empirical or logical.

Positive belief - a positive belief is a logical proposition which is held to be true. This distinction is important because refusing to hold a logical proposition to be true does not require one to hold its negation to be true. While we must acknowledge that, given two logically contradictory statements, one must be true and the other false; we can ne

The Kalam Cosmological Argument is Invalid

2012-06-15T00:34:14-08:00

(Post Voting Period)

The classical Kalam Cosmological Argument (KCA) is as follows[1]:

1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence;
2. The universe has a beginning of its existence;
3. Therefore: The universe has a cause of its existence.

I will be arguing that the KCA is not only unsound, but is invalid! That is, even if the premises (#1 and #2) were to be true, the conclusion (#3) does not logically follow from them.

Beginning of Existence

Herein lies the crux of the argument. What does it mean for something to have a beginning of its existence?

Let us look at the first premise:

"Everything that has a beginning of

Resolved: The execution of Muammar Gaddafi by rebel forces was justified without a fair trial

2011-12-09T21:06:04-08:00
(Post Voting Period)
This is for Socialpinko's debate tournament.

The resolution is: The execution of Muammar Gaddafi by rebel forces was justified without a fair trial

Con (Lordknukle) argues that the execution of Gaddafi was not justified without a fair trial
Pro (Drafterman) argues that the execution of Gaddafi was justified without a fair trial

Key Terms:

Muammar Gaddafi- The former Libyan dictator and ruler who was executed by rebel forces

Execution- The ending of a human life

Rebel forces- The citizens that overthrew Gaddafi and his violent regime

Justified- Acceptable by an international doctorine

Fair Trial- It is oft stated that, in America, 50% of marriages end in divorce. Whether or not this statistic is accurate, what is certainly true is that divorce takes a toll on the splitting couple, both emotionally and financially.

Financial:

The average cost of a divorce can range from $15k to $30k (1). Given that people are often encouraged to treat divorce as a punishment, hiring a blood-thirsty lawyer to rob the other party, divorced couples are often worse off than if they had never married (2).

Beyond court and attorney fees, the couple will now be singly taking on expenses that were shared while married (utilities, mortgage) and, in most cases, at least one person will have to find a new place to live. While taking on such things is no different than single people who do this every day, divorce can force a

Society should not regulate carbon or CO2 output.

2011-10-04T07:20:17-08:00
(Post Voting Period) There is no sound basis for carbon regulation or taxation. Without such a basis our society should ignore all attempts at the various proposed regulation schemes. Some well known examples are cap and trade, 80% reduction from 1990 levels by 2050, Kyoto, et al. Carbon, in the form of CO2, is directly harmless to humans and other forms of life in the general atmosphere. It is the same gas we exhale and plants intake. It is an essential part of the well understood respiration and photosynthesis cycle of animals and plants. [1] Science, as presently practiced, is unsuitable as a sole basis for carbon and climate based policy. Consider the level of quality control applied to important endeavors such as bridges, dams, power plants, aircraft, and cars. As a society we demand that these items carry minimal risk and so require some of the most stringent quality control measures available. We have external oversight organizations that test, inspect, and certify

" inappropriate lyrics should be banned from the radio "

2011-10-09T22:50:41-08:00
(Post Voting Period) Currently so called " inappropriate" language is banned from the radio and television, which violates the first amendment of the Unites States Constitution. I have proof of this because the exact deffinition of Freedom Of Speech is " freedom to speak freely without censorship ". The key word being censorship. This means that the media has no right whatsoever to validate what is " good " and " bad " language.

Famer's Story-Writing Debate Round #1 Zaradi vs. Drafterman

2012-04-16T13:03:11-08:00
(Post Voting Period)
"I thank my opponent, Drafterman, for taking part of Famer's story writing debating tournament. The basic idea of this debate is that both sides must together write a story. Whoever creates the most interesting continuation/orientation/conclusion of the story wins the vote for "most convincing arguments"

Rules of this debate:

8000 characters maximum
72 hours for time to argue
7 days voting period
Yes to voting comments

Points for spelling and grammar are awarded as per usual.

There will be no points awarded for sources.

However, as the rules of the tournament goes, if any of the debaters forfeits a round (unless both forfeits an equals number of times), they will, by default automatically lose all 7 points as a result.

Good Luck!"

Title of story: Running out of Time

------

When I came to, I realized that I wasn't i

Belief in the Old Testament precludes belief in the New Testament or Koran

2011-11-08T08:27:26-08:00
(Post Voting Period) I posted a similar debate a while back, but I unfortunately didn't have time to finish it. My premise is simple; if you believe in the Old Testament's divinity, ala traditional Christianity or Islam, and that what it says is true, (at least) superficially understandable, and flawless (in the sense a perfect God wrote it) then any subsequent additions that change the message of the text, like the New Testament and the Koran, are incompatible with the Old Testament, and because they acknowledge the veracity of it, invalidate themselves. I have two basic proofs: 1) When God introduced the system of commandments on Mount Sinai, he spoke to the entire Jewish nation of 1.2 million people [3]. This is described in Exodus [1], and more extensively in Deuteronomy [2]. This presumably was so no one could possibly claim that they were being fooled by a charlatan. Either way, it certainly had that effect and, more importantly, set up a standard for divine revelatio