The Instigator
NKJVPrewrather
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
myopinionisrightidiot
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points

Is acceptance a right?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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...
myopinionisrightidiot
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/16/2018 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 438 times Debate No: 108150
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

NKJVPrewrather

Con

The burden of poof is on po. Mak he first move.
myopinionisrightidiot

Pro

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to understand Acceptance. The humour is extremely subtle, and without a solid grasp of theoretical physics most of the jokes will go over a typical viewer"s head. There"s also Gods nihilistic outlook, which is deftly woven into his characterisation- his personal philosophy draws heavily from Narodnaya Volya literature, for instance. The fans understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of these jokes, to realise that they"re not just funny- they say something deep about LIFE. As a consequence people who acceptance truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn"t appreciate, for instance, the humour in Gods existential catchphrase "Shall there be light," which itself is a cryptic reference to Turgenev"s Russian epic Fathers and Sons. I"m smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as luke bendmonton's genius wit unfolds itself on their television screens. What fools.. how I pity them. 😂

And yes, by the way, i DO have a acceptance tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It"s for the ladies" eyes only- and even then they have to demonstrate that they"re within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand. Nothin personnel kid 😎
Debate Round No. 1
NKJVPrewrather

Con

I think I understand acceptance pretty wll, everyone does. Is it a right? Nope. You don't have the right to force me to accept you. I am fine with tolerance, but my acceptance is conditional.
myopinionisrightidiot

Pro

Your not looking at acceptance at the right way. It says acceptance as a value, such as excepting others of differences. It is a moral, that is a right. Every man, now all women as well, in the amendments is accepting of others. You are looking at acceptance as if I accept an apology or of that manner.
Debate Round No. 2
NKJVPrewrather

Con

That is your subjective opinion. I don't have to accept that which I don't want to accept. Can you prove that acceptance is a right?
myopinionisrightidiot

Pro

It depends on how you want to receive the word Acceptance. You could say that Acceptance is mandatory, from the First Amendment of accepting others of their differences, since they have their own right to have what they can and can not say without criticism. If you are talking about an apology, it is in your right to not accept it. But if it is accepting someone of a different race or color, then it is not in your right to not accept them. You are able to think it in your head if you so desire, but in accepting other people, the First Amendment will protect them, ensuring that you will "accept" them.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by David_Debates 3 years ago
David_Debates
NKJVPrewrathermyopinionisrightidiotTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 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: Spelling and grammar go to Pro, from many spelling mistakes in R1 & R2 which made it difficult to understand her statements. No sources used, no conduct violations. For arguments, Pro memes on Con hard in R1. If there was a humor section, I'd give it to you, Pro. Con responds by stating that acceptance must be conditional without actually defining what she means by the term. Pro points out the lack of clarity, by stating acceptance is a value, not like allowing someone to apologize. Con says that this is a subjective opinion, asking Pro to prove that acceptance is a right. Pro once again makes the point that Con is not clarifying her own debate, showing how Con is using the word "acceptance" in two different ways. Pro then argues how being accepting of others is mandatory by law and ought to be, as it is the moral thing to do. While I agree with Con, I must give this round to Pro. And holy hell that was a fantastic copypasta meme, 10/10.

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