The Instigator
Pro (for)
4 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
0 Points

Diabetes Should 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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/15/2018 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 903 times Debate No: 108127
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (1)



Here we are at debate #14. I have already done 13 debates with you. Well, I believe that diabetes should be illegal.

Diabetic people are fat. Fat people absorb too much sunlight, which will cause plants to not be able to produce, so plants will die, and then herbivores will die, and then carnivores who eat herbivores will die, and then the superior Russians will die out. Russian people are supreme to every race.

Also, diabetics have to pee all the time, so they either stink up the world or flush too much and cause the world to run out of water.

We have 3 rounds, and you have a max of 8000 characters.


I'll only use a few words. You're insane, you have no scientific proof to back up your insane claims, all you care about is Russian polar bears, and your sick and grotesque routine is getting a bit old. Nevertheless, I will try to go through this with a smile and defeat you.
Debate Round No. 1


Diabetes makes people have to pee all the time, which is really annoying. Also, diabetics are fat, and they eat too much. That is why I hate diabetic people, just like Indians or blacks.

What do you have to say?


Nothing, really. You've said it all.
Debate Round No. 2


So what do you think? Should diabetes be illegal.

14 debates this year: complete!


Diabetes is not an option- it is a serious, incurable disease, and people who have to deal with it should not have to pay extra money because they have a disease.

You sick cookie.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by asta 2 years ago
Pro is a hypocrite.
Posted by whiteflame 3 years ago
>Reported vote: ApotheosisOrangutan// Mod action: Removed<

5 points to Con (Conduct, S&G, Arguments). Reasons for voting decision: Con won 100% for me, mostly because I believe Pro's conduct was immature and they may have been trolling based on the uneducated way they provided evidence for their claims. Diabetes is more than just fat people that have a constant need for urination; many have unpreventable type 1 and nothing is more immoral than punishing someone for something they had no control over. Con maintained professionalism throughout their argument, this making their spelling and grammar as well as word choice better. Neither provided sources.

[*Reason for removal*] (1) Conduct is insufficiently explained. The voter is required to point to specific instances where one side was insulting, or point out forfeits or rule breaking that occurred in order to award this point. Perceived immaturity and trolling are not sufficient. (2) S&G is insufficiently explained. Unless one of the debaters" arguments is difficult to understand, the vote may not award this point. It"s not clear that that"s the case. (3) Arguments are insufficiently explained. The voter appears to assess only Pro"s arguments, and appears to do so solely by providing his own views on the issue. The voter is required to specifically assess arguments presented by both sides, and not merely generalize about Con"s professionalism.
Posted by Abelard 3 years ago
I'm a type one diabetic you offend me go to h*ll
Posted by frankfurter50 3 years ago
The guy's nuts.
Posted by Cherrypalm 3 years ago
Posted by frankfurter50 3 years ago
Posted by Masterful 3 years ago
Let someone else debate him you f**king pleb
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by David_Debates 3 years ago
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro because Con insulted him throughout. No sources means it is tied for both Pro and Con. For spelling and grammar, both Pro and Con made mistakes, but none of them made difficult to understand their points. Arguments will go to Pro. Con kept claiming throughout the debate that Pro was "insane" or "sick." Con had no arguments except for in R3, where he claimed (unsubstantiated) that diabetes was "a serious and incurable disease." Pro was denied the ability to rebut this argument, which was another reason I am giving conduct to Pro. Pro contended that diabetes ought to be illegal because they are fat, waste resources, and are drains on food. Con never attempted to rebut these claims, even though they were made in R1. While both Pro and Con's claims were unsubstantiated, Pro made more, explained his reasoning effectively, and allowed Con the ability to attempt a refutation. While I personally disagree with Pro, I vote for him, as Con was unable to put forward any refutation.

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.