The Instigator
TRUMPMAGADONALD
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
kyleniel
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Pedosexuality is never wrong

Do you like this debate?NoYes-1
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/12/2018 Category: Entertainment
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,689 times Debate No: 116484
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (56)
Votes (0)

 

TRUMPMAGADONALD

Pro

To be honest, pedosexuality is the best sexuality. I don't think non-pedosexuals are bad people, but I do think they are horrible people. I don't hate non-pedosexuals, but I honestly think that they should all just die. They are only a problem for us. It would be easier for us if all of them just died. Look at those 18 year-old creatures that call themselves "women". So old. How could anyone think to touch that with a penis? I would rather give my penis into soft hands of a little 4 year-old girl. Yeah, that's much better. Sex with children is the greatest thing ever. And it's never wrong. There are some scientists who claim that sex with children is wrong because it hurts children. But that's just not correct. Sex with children is never wrong. Like, even if child dies from it, it's still not wrong. Because it's great. Also it's not against my will.
kyleniel

Con

What are you talking about?
Debate Round No. 1
TRUMPMAGADONALD

Pro

Pedosexuality - sexual activities between adult and a child.
I hope this clears it up for you.
kyleniel

Con

Is this some satire?
Debate Round No. 2
TRUMPMAGADONALD

Pro

No, it's not satire. My position is that pedosexuality is never wrong. Absolutely never. If you aren't going to debate that, I don't know why you accepted the challenge.
kyleniel

Con

Okay. Let's get to business then.

Children can't consent to sex, so it is rape, and it is wrong.

If you think that children not being able to make these choices renders them uninvolved in law, then it is also okay to murder them.

Simple enough.
Debate Round No. 3
TRUMPMAGADONALD

Pro

"Children can't consent to sex, so it is rape, and it is wrong."
So being rape makes something wrong?
That's not true. Sex with children is rape and yet it's not wrong. Sex with children being rape is not a valid reason to make it wrong.

"If you think that children not being able to make these choices renders them uninvolved in law, then it is also okay to murder them." - Law doesn't decide what is okay and what is not. And I never said I think that, so I have no idea where are you getting this from.
kyleniel

Con

Rape is always wrong man. Or at least it is wrong when it is against innocent people, such as children.

Well then replace law with morality.
Debate Round No. 4
TRUMPMAGADONALD

Pro

1) "Rape is always wrong man. Or at least it is wrong when it is against innocent people, such as children."
I can agree that rape is sometimes wrong. For example, it would be wrong to rape me. Because I am not a child. But it wouldn't be wrong to rape a child.
Rape of children is never wrong, never immoral, never obsolete, never against our goals.
Pedosexuality should be the goal of every society.

2) "Well then replace law with morality."
"If you think that children not being able to make these choices renders them uninvolved in morality, then it is also okay to murder them."
Oh, I have a very special version of morality. Children are involved in it. My morality consists that existence, perseverance and maximal spread of pedosexuality is our goal. Because of that, we can't just murder children. We would diminish pedosexuality as a result. Same way, if we imprison a child molester, we would save all of his future victims, and greatly diminish pedosexuality.

Since this is the last round, I guess I will say good debate. You write short, but sound and you are on point. Which is good.
kyleniel

Con

No, it's always wrong to rape a child, because rape is wrong in most, if not all, cases. So itis especially wrong to rape children, who are innocent.

Well, you can't have a special type of morality because yours is illogical.
Debate Round No. 5
56 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Weeb777 3 years ago
Weeb777
Children are not interested in sex so its rape. People do not become interested in sex until they are in puberty as a teenager. Children are not sexually developed and raping them can cause many issues for them later on. Also some of the things you said in the debate like "I would rather give my penis into soft hands of a little 4 year-old girl" is disgusting and I hope you get put on list you sicko.
Posted by BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2 3 years ago
BryanMullinsNOCHRISTMAS2
this debate was messed up. The topic is messed up too.
Posted by TRUMPMAGADONALD 3 years ago
TRUMPMAGADONALD
"But if someone goes in a debate and their only defence is: "It is my opinion." this is not a solid defence."
This was not my only defense. My defense also included refuting reasons such as "children can't consent", "they will be hurt"...etc.

"If you think your opponent though that morality was subjective as well, then why is this even a debate?"
I already answered this. I only created a debate for fun. It's point was never to convince anyone of anything.

" Anyone who knows that everyone can like different colors because this sort of thing is subjective, would not start the debate. This proves that you did not think of morality as subjective before."
Eh, no it doesn't. Because as I said: I started debate because I thought it might be fun. Your analogy is also flawed. Pedosexuality is not a color, and you are right, I wouldn't start a debate about colors, not because I think it's subjective as well, but because I wouldn't find that fun.
Posted by Alex.oland 3 years ago
Alex.oland
Yes, debates are about opinions. But if someone goes in a debate and their only defence is: "It is my opinion." this is not a solid defence.

Well, there are people who think morality is objective. Con was likely one of them because he just said that rape is wrong no matter what. You needed to prove that morality was subjective to the con and you would have won. By "winning" I mean making strong arguments when your opponent is not. Con clearly made no strong arguments.

If you think your opponent though that morality was subjective as well, then why is this even a debate? This is something like defending that yellow is the most good-looking color. It does not make sense. Anyone who knows that everyone can like different colors because this sort of thing is subjective, would not start the debate. This proves that you did not think of morality as subjective before.

You could be just joking but your defence seemed like it was serious and your comments seemed even more serious.

If you measured who won only by looking at who is convinced, we would tie to conspiracy theorists all the time.
Posted by TRUMPMAGADONALD 3 years ago
TRUMPMAGADONALD
"If what you are saying is true, you can win any argument just by saying: "It's my opinion though.""
First, define winning. If you mean, win the debate by votes, then no. Nothing I said mentions or even implies that you can win the votes by stating "it's just my opinion". However, if by winning, you mean failing to convince me that pedosexuality is wrong because I hold to my opinion, then you would be right. Because it is true that no one can convince me that pedosexuality is ever wrong.

"The title is clearly deceptive. If your title was: "pedosexuality is never wrong, in my opinion." no one would accept the debate as, yes, it is wrong in your opinion."
First, you would need to prove that no one would accept the debate.
Second, I think it's widely known that debates are about opinions and morality is about opinion. So you complain about not being informed that the debate will be my opinion and that I will use my opinion in arguments? What did you expect it's gonna be? Your opinion? Trump's opinion? Of course if I start a debate, I will start it with my opinion.

"Let's say there is a debate called: "God is %100 real no doubt" you accept this debate and pro says: "That is just my opinion. I did not claim it was true for everyone." did pro win?"
First, I have no idea what do you mean by winning. Did pro convince the con? Likely not. Did pro win more votes? I don't know.
Second, every debate will always be about opinions. Now either someone will directly say "that's my opinion", either he will present his opinion through reasons which in his opinion(again) prove or disprove what has been said. So it's always an opinion. I think what you are really complaining about is me not giving reasons for my opinion/morality. I admit, In that sense, title is deceptive, because people probably expected reasons for why pedosexuality is never wrong, and I didn't provide any, because as I previously stated, I don't have them or need them.
Posted by Alex.oland 3 years ago
Alex.oland
I already pointed at it. Tell me what anyone would understand from the title. You argue that: "The title could just be stating my opinion..." but that is absurd! If what you are saying is true, you can win any argument just by saying: "It's my opinion though." You see the mistake here? The title is clearly deceptive. If your title was: "pedosexuality is never wrong, in my opinion." no one would accept the debate as, yes, it is wrong in your opinion.

Let's say there is a debate called: "God is %100 real no doubt" you accept this debate and pro says: "That is just my opinion. I did not claim it was true for everyone." did pro win?
Posted by TRUMPMAGADONALD 3 years ago
TRUMPMAGADONALD
"The important thing here is, I thought that I knew for sure that ghosts existed."
Or it could be that you were just joking, or maybe being sarcastic, or maybe really thought for sure that ghosts existed.

You seem to be fixed on the idea that title of the debate is somehow deceptive, although you didn't explain why. Does title say pedosexuality is never wrong? It says that. Was that my position during the debate? It was. So title is not deceptive in any way.

"could I win by saying: "That is my opinion though."?"
Just because I argued it in a particular way doesn't make the title deceptive, because I never said in the title it won't be up to my opinion. That was just your assumption.

"Could it be that you noticed you made a mistake after you finished the debate? Probably."
What mistake are you talking about?

"This sounds strange coming from a man who just said that morality is subjective because if it is subjective"
You seem to be misunderstanding what subjective morality means. Does it mean that my morality is influenced by my feelings about it? Yes, it does. Does it mean I need to accept opinions of other people as a valid for my morality? No. I can completely negate their opinions and only consider my opinion a valid one for a morality. So when only my opinion is considered as valid for morality, pedosexuality is never wrong. And this is what I have defended in the comments. The debate went on a different path because different arguments were presented.

"after this line you noticed your flaw and changed your views"
No, I didn't change my views. My view still remained that pedosexuality is never wrong. And again, what flaw? You seem to be talking about some mistake I made, but you don't seem to be able to point at it.
Posted by Alex.oland 3 years ago
Alex.oland
You do not understand. Maybe you do not want to understand. When I say "Ghosts are real." it is irrelevant if I can prove it or not. The important thing here is, I thought that I knew for sure that ghosts existed. If I started a debate called: "Ghosts are real." and someone accepted that debate, could I win by saying: "That is my opinion though."? No, I can not. The title is clearly deceptive.

You said morality is subjective in the comments? Great. Good for you. I am wondering why you never mentioned it in the debate though? Could it be that you noticed you made a mistake after you finished the debate? Probably.

What I am saying is not just a simple guess either. The way you debated in the comments and in the main debate is different. In the last round, your opponent said raping is wrong. And you replied:
"Rape of children is never wrong, never immoral, never obsolete, never against our goals.
Pedosexuality should be the goal of every society."
This sounds strange coming from a man who just said that morality is subjective because if it is subjective, then pedosexuality can easily be wrong. You just need some people who believe it is wrong and as we all know, the world is full of those people. So you claiming that every society should have that goal does not make sense as only a small portion of people really desire that.

My theory is, after my reply which contains the line : "..me saying: 'I find raping children wrong. So it is wrong.' is considered a solid defence as well." after this line you noticed your flaw and changed your views.

Maybe you do not realise that you changed your own views because you are only concentrated on defending your main belief: Pedosexuality , you did not pay attention to the things you said earlier.
Posted by TRUMPMAGADONALD 3 years ago
TRUMPMAGADONALD
My title didn't say "THIS IS AN OBJECTIVE TRUTH". That's just your interpretation of it.

I already presented the case in previous comments, morality is always subjective(influenced by feelings).

"Ghosts are real." - To me, this wouldn't sound as an objective truth until it's proven.

"Still, you could have won the debate by only saying: "I find it wrong so it is wrong."." - The debate itself went on a different path. First 3 rounds were basically empty in substance. In the last round, I did mention something close to that.
Posted by Alex.oland 3 years ago
Alex.oland
Still, you could have won the debate by only saying: "I find it wrong so it is wrong.". You did not.

"Ghosts are real." read that sentence and decide if only I believe that or if I believe that ghosts are objectively real. It sounds like I am trying to show an objective truth, yes? That is what your title sounds like. You did not say: "Oh it is always wrong according to me." in the title. You made it sound like it was an objective truth.
No votes have been placed for this debate.

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