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

Respect should be earned

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: 8/23/2015 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,469 times Debate No: 78970
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (12)
Votes (1)




I disagree that this should be the standard and will argue that it shouldn't.

respect-to show consideration for; treat courteously or kindly.


The reason why respect should be earned is simple, not everyone is a good person, not everyone deserves to be held in the same regard as everyone else.

Should we respect the feelings of those who have inflicted harm on others for no good cause?

If a Scientist and someone who has almost no scientific knowledge opinions on a very pressing topic be held in the same regard?

If someone is an expert in a field their voice should be the first one heard, not someone who has no experience in it

people should not have to pretend to like everyone they meet, because a lot of people don't deserve respect.
Debate Round No. 1


The burden of proof is shared in this debate. I would like to go back to the definition of respect in this round. The definition of respect is not, looking up to someone, or being overly nice to them. Its simply giving every person the common courtesy they deserve.

The paradigm my opponent uses is destructive and circular because it sets up a role where others must first be kind to you, yet if they believe your same standard then you have to be nice to them first. This means no one ends up getting respect. I believe everyone deserves to be treated equally and with a basic level of respect. If a person disrespects you that is a different story.

A snippet of a post by child of a NPD mother states:
Like many abused kids, as a child I was not allowed to express anger, or even to give any outward appearance that I felt it.

This meant her mother abused her, and if she showed anger about the “badness” of her mother’s abuse, she was seen as “bad”. Does that mean she is truly bad?

In order to become “good”, we need to do “bad”. By doing “bad” does not mean we are “bad” or “evil”. Everyone changes. A “good” person may change to bad due to bad influences, but a bad person can change to good by good influences.

So by disrespecting someone who’s bad…you’re not exactly helping them to become “good” are you? Plus, you’re not even doing an act a “good” person would do as you’re spreading that belief that it’s alright to disrespect the “bad” and let them stay “bad” forever. It is difficult for a bad to become “good” if they do not get help and are always pushed aside, their beliefs will turn into truth for them.

Is it hard to respect someone? Is it hard to disrespect someone? They are equal in “hard”, it is only in your mind that one is harder because it has not been attempted for long periods of time. Utopia is only an excuse not to respect someone, because it is used as a “if”. There’s not “ifs” in respect, it’s not I will do it if, I will do that if, you just do it because if you don’t, that “if” will never occur and you’ll never learn to respect others freely.

The most basic respect does not require trust, it is not personal respect.

Basic respect - Have due regard for (someone"s feelings, wishes, or rights)
Personal respect -
A feeling of deep admiration for someone or something elicited by their abilities, qualities, or achievements.

Trust must be earnt and that can lead to respect, however, you do not need to trust someone to respect someone. You may not trust the media, but by respecting the media, you don’t insult the one who did it and spread rumours in order to put the media down. You may criticize them, you may disagree with them and tell others to do so, but you do not do so in a threatening manner and make it a personal offence to the media staff.

To conclude the debate, I would like to quote something from Narcissist’s child.

“Curiously, while we take the position that strangers must earn our respect, we fully expect those strangers to treat us with the respect and courtesy we have made no effort to “earn” from them. It’s a one-way street in our minds—others should treat us with respect but they must earn ours—and we don’t even realize it!

If you take the time to really think about it, you have to come to the conclusion that respect simply cannot be earned. No one person is sufficiently intuitive and simultaneously fluid of personality that they can divine and appropriately react to an infinite, and infinitely changing, set of demands. You cannot please all of the people all of the time—and when it comes to earning respect, you cannot even know what all of the people think you need to do.

If you want to be respected, there is a simple way to achieve that: respect others. Respect their feelings, their rights, their existence. Give them respect as a matter of course and only withhold it when a specific person has done a specific thing that is worthy of withdrawing it. Set the bar high—determine that taking your respect away from a person is a serious thing, not to be taken lightly or in response to something small, like disagreeing with you politically. In fact, to my way of thinking, it is only demonstrating an ingrained lack of respect for others that warrants the withdrawal of my respect.

You might consider this the next time you think another person should earn your respect rather than you giving it freely and giving him a chance to earn your disrespect instead.”


With your comparison of Basic Respect and Personal Respect I believe you are mistaking politeness with respect

"Respect" according to Merriam-Webster is "a feeling of admiring someone or something that is good, valuable, important, etc"


So with this you are implying that we should admire everything and everyone, regardless of what they do or say, Politeness is something that everyone should be by default, not polite
Debate Round No. 2


Nope. Judges you can entirely throw PRO's definition in the trash can. He has accepted my definition by accepting the round, which includes politness and anything partaining to basic respect. No where do I say we should admire everyone. My definition stands, his isn't allowed, meaning he has presented litterally no arguments against my case thus far. This means I am upholding my BOP to show why we shoud all be given basic respect, while my opponent hasn't fullfilled his to show people should have to earn basic respect.

So far pro loses automatically. My opponent's last chance to argue is next round.


So you changed the definition of respect for your own purpose and then you are claiming that I presented no argument because my argument did not fit your straw-men definition of respect?
Debate Round No. 3


This round ends very simply. Here's the story.

I started a debate that respect should be earner, where respect means common courtesy, politness and care for a person's basic rights and value as a person. My oppenent neglected to read littelly the second of only two lines in the first round, where I define it as such. Pro instead accepts the debate with a different definition of respect which he posted the round before last and said we are actually debating that definition. Thing is, he already accepted my definition by joining this debate.

Furthermore, the definition shift is my opponent's Only argument, being that this is now void, my arguments go utterly unrefuted and my burden of proof is fulfilled, meanwhile Pro fails to justify that we should make people earn what I call basic respect.

There is only one logical choice here, vote con.



My opponent used a false definition of respect that is not possible to argue against, he accuses me of term shifting whereas he was the one who used the false term in the first place, his entire argument he mistakes Politeness and respect.

Don't vote for someone who makes up definitions for his own Agenda, Vote Pro
Debate Round No. 4
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by lol101 3 years ago
Asking people to join and attack you every hour is annoying. Of course I was annoyed.
Posted by lol101 3 years ago
@Amore It's not my fault. I do report the comments. Trust me, I was worse than this once. But don't place all of this blame on me, getting annoyed is some-what normal if someone constantly attacks and annoys you. The situation is fine now.
Posted by Amore-mystery-et-Verite-2 3 years ago
@Lol101. Block them. And I agree with Junior, you get annoyed real easy.
Posted by provideoman123 3 years ago
Please do not delete my comments. I use them as proof of my cordiality and respect and did not mean to attack anyone or offend anyone.

With respect.
Posted by lol101 3 years ago
Rage is an overstatement. I get angry, not enraged. These guys keep on following me around and attacking me.
Posted by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 3 years ago
....Raging is never the answer....
Posted by lol101 3 years ago
@TheJunior, and what? These people are being annoying, disrespectful, rude, mean, insulting, etc.
Posted by lol101 3 years ago
Provideoman123 and gokuFNAF2, stop attacking me.
Posted by VargasGray 3 years ago
For what it's worth.

Respect must be earned; politeness should be a given. It's irksome that too many mingle these two concepts together and believe them to signify the same thing or, in the least, point towards the same area of social interaction. Respect does not require politeness nor friendliness or anything of the sort, but it requires action and/or a certain way of being; I'd claim it's given to a person whom performed a action or remained a certain way with the internal mover to illicit the feeling(s) we collectively call respect. Respect is a kind of (for want of word) transcendent emotion of sort, I don't mean divine, since it can remove walls between individuals and/or groups to allow for a sympathetic connection.
Posted by TheJuniorVarsityNovice 3 years ago
Haha, Lol101 you rage a lot.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Midnight1131 3 years ago
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 Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro dropped all of Con's arguments, and never refuted a single one. Instead they decided to argue about the definition, Pro was trying to use their own definition, however they were not allowed to do this, because Con had already provided a definition of "respect" in the first round, and by accepting the debate Pro accepted that definition, therefore Con's definition is the one that will be used. Con presented interesting arguments, such as how the "earn respect" system that Pro was talking about leads to no one being respected, because they all believe that someone should respect them before they do the same. Con already won the debate here, because they showed the fault in a "respect should be earned" system, and Pro never refuted this, or any other arguments.