The Instigator
girg
Pro (for)
Losing
14 Points
The Contender
16kadams
Con (against)
Winning
38 Points

Homosexuality is natural.

Do you like this debate?NoYes-9
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 10 votes the winner is...
16kadams
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/26/2012 Category: Health
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,042 times Debate No: 24462
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (14)
Votes (10)

 

girg

Pro

This debate is whether homosexuality is natural or not. I stand for PRO, that homosexuality is natural. First round is for acceptance.
16kadams

Con

Accepted!!

3,000 character limit :(
Debate Round No. 1
girg

Pro


I messaged you. I am already in process of this same debate with another user, Id rather not repeat it.
So here is a photograph of a feline requiring a dietary supplement of an American cheeseburger.
16kadams

Con

Yes you messaged me, it was actually very rude. I ask you for a debate, you challenge me (essentially saying yes). AFTER this debate began you ditched this obligation in place for another. Here is an analogy that makes sens to everyone:

One party says it "might" invite you. This party invites you inside. After formal greetings (after yo RSVP'd) you decide to go to the other one because they accepted you in. So you go in private to the party leader, owner, whatever and say I am leaving for another party, this party would be repetitive.

--> rude.

My opponent was very rude and therefore conduct vote should be towards CON.

So vote 1 - 0 con favor.
Debate Round No. 2
girg

Pro

I messaged you saying that it will be cancelled.
I challenged you at your request, so its like asking to get invited to a party. This will give the party leader to cancel as he pleases. I did not ditch the obligation, I had an exact same obligation. For example, if I want to go run a marathon with a friend, and then want to go to a different one with a different friend because I'm not sure if it could do the first one, it would be pointless to do both. Just combine them. If you want to follow the debate, follow ScottyDouglas and my debate with him.
CON is unreasonable is being a strawman, a classic logical fallacy to make me look like I am an attacker pulled from quick and expanded assumptions.
16kadams

Con

[--Messaging--]

This is irrelevant, I actually denounced the act hinting it was rude in the PM.

[--My opponents analogy's--]

His analogy actually helps my case. So he says he challenged me, correct. He started the party. So his analogy is I asked, he invited me and he began. He then quit the party mid flight. If anything this is MORE rude then the way I put it, therefore his analogy helps my cause. So he made he party then left essentially saying he preferred the other party/person. In other words this helps my conduct case. Also as stated DDO usually thinks if an initiator starts a debate he should be able to finish it.

His second analogy is a marathon, but this application fails. Because our debate already began. So we are running, he gets a phone call and says I just got invited by someone else to another marathon bye. As this one initiated first it would seem rude to quit the first obligation in the name of another, especially when you are the instigator.

--> Both analogies show he did a conduct violation, mine does as well. Either way I win the conduct point.

[--Strawman?--]

A strawman is a fallacy that is informal that means I am misrepresenting ones position [1][2]. Calling someone out for a conduct violation is not misrepresenting your position. Your position is technically I want to leave this debate, I am in another. This is proven by your round 2 post. So I stated you want to quit the debate in the name of another, which is proven by your own words:

"I am already in process of this same debate with another user, Id rather not repeat it."

So no strawman was committed.

Reasons to vote CON --
Arguments: Dont vote on arguments in this debate, the argument point is the conduct point to con (or no points to either if you thought pro won). I won because his own arguments (analogies) proved my point, and mine did as well.
Sources: Me, I had them. He should have cited his strawman argument, as the way he explained it was false.
Spelling: Tied, we both had some mistakes. Though his format was poor, so give it to me (optional).
Conduct: This is replacing the arguments vote here, and I showed his argument proved my side. His concussions where false and mislead.

--> Vote should be 3 - 0 to CON. Or 4 - 0 con. Depending on your stance on the S/G.



Sources:
1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
2. http://www.nizkor.org...
Debate Round No. 3
14 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by 16kadams 3 years ago
16kadams
Posted by:
16kadams
 
So you challenge me and quit, well...
Posted by 16kadams 3 years ago
16kadams
It had sarcasm
Posted by girg 3 years ago
girg
Yes, you responded to both, but didnt give me the green OR red light. You didnt say whether it was okay to continue or that you quit. Better communication on your part would have helped.
Posted by 16kadams 3 years ago
16kadams
I would debate you on it
Posted by ScarletGhost4396 3 years ago
ScarletGhost4396
No offense Adams, but this debate sucked...lol
Posted by 16kadams 3 years ago
16kadams
I responded to both
Posted by girg 3 years ago
girg
Well how was I supposed to know you gave the green light? You never responded to my message.
Posted by 16kadams 3 years ago
16kadams
Yes but these are valid votes based on DDO traditions in instances like this. Both parties must agree to an ending like this, the second party (me) never gave the green light.
Posted by girg 3 years ago
girg
Guys you must realize, i didn't really "bail" on the debate. I asked for an ending BEFORE any points were made. Plus neither of us actually presented any material on the topic anyways.
Posted by 16kadams 3 years ago
16kadams
That pro guy made con lol.
10 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by Cobo 3 years ago
Cobo
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Vote counter...
Vote Placed by Ore_Ele 3 years ago
Ore_Ele
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: forfeit.
Vote Placed by ScarletGhost4396 3 years ago
ScarletGhost4396
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Yeah....PRO...I don't think I can say anything here that hasn't already been said by the people who voted earlier.
Vote Placed by ScottyDouglas 3 years ago
ScottyDouglas
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: I give everything to 16k for obvious reasons. Pro brought forth no case at all and Con displayed the interest of a heated debate but was denied. Con wanted to debate. Con also gave more resources. Con had better spelling and grammer. I tied the arguments because Con also did not stay on track and throughout the whole debate.
Vote Placed by waterskier 3 years ago
waterskier
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: umm I think it's obvious who won
Vote Placed by AlwaysMoreThanYou 3 years ago
AlwaysMoreThanYou
girg16kadamsTied
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: Pro presented no arguments topical to the resolution, therefore he automatically fails to uphold it necessitating arguments be given to Con. Conduct to Con because Pro tried to back out.
Vote Placed by Ron-Paul 3 years ago
Ron-Paul
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Reasons for voting decision: Counter-VB HonestDiscussioner, who presents a blatant VB. I guess you don't see the concession.
Vote Placed by HonestDiscussioner 3 years ago
HonestDiscussioner
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Since the resolution was never addressed period, this wasn't really a debate, so my vote is to counter the previous two votes. I really do give Pro the conduct, he attempted to withdraw from the debate BEFORE any arguments were made, therefore I would not call that a forfeit. Con's refusal to let anything slide and insist the debate continue rather than accepting a draw is not very sportsmanlike. If Con had given arguments and then Pro had asked to leave, then that would have been a forfeit.
Vote Placed by Nur-Ab-Sal 3 years ago
Nur-Ab-Sal
girg16kadamsTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Wow, conduct and arguments to Con for Pro's apparent derailment of the debate.
Vote Placed by stubs 3 years ago
stubs
girg16kadamsTied
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: I would consider that a forfeit