The Instigator
LightTower936
Pro (for)
Winning
4 Points
The Contender
Abeston
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Should vampires exist

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...
LightTower936
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/22/2018 Category: Religion
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,050 times Debate No: 116776
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (2)
Votes (1)

 

LightTower936

Pro

Because of my previous debate here: http://www.debate.org... not having anyone to vote due to Debate Round Forfeited problem, I have to start the new round. Let's start.

Yes, they should exist in real life. Vampires are immortal and therefore wouldn't die from aging, other natural causes, or even from diseases or viruses. Imagine living forever for billions of years. After becoming a vampire, you'll no longer have to worry about death nor getting injured from most weaponry and such. You'll no longer have to go to hospitals due to regeneration abilities you'd have as a vampire. I really want vampires, their society, culture, tech, etc, like in Seraph of the End/Owari no Seraph franchise http://owarinoseraph.wikia.com...... . So yes, vampires should exist in real life. >:)

Hollywood makes them out to be things like sparkly beings who suck on blood. Or maybe ancient creatures that have committed heinous crimes against humanity by killing people.

But, humanity kills its own kind as well. They wage wars, steal from each other, create lies and deception for power. Humans hurt each other more than any supernatural being could ever achieve.

"The vampires suck blood. They're gonna kill and/or turn us all into monsters and overpopulate the Earth!" you say.

Well, that's false. For one, they only drink blood because they need it to function. If they didn't they'd shrivel up and die. Stop thinking you humans are the only things that have blood. Plenty of other creatures have blood. What's to say a vampire can't just drink animal blood?

Also, vampires are low-key creatures. They ain't gonna bite people willy-nilly. Because once you bite a human, and they turn, then you're basically it's undead parent.

Do you know, have any idea, how much work and responsibility it takes to raise a child? And what if the vampire bites multiple humans?

Yes, that's right. A heck of a lot more package comes. You gotta teach it what to do, what not to do, how to control their new powers, etc. It's super stressful to say the least.

So, yes, I think they should. Because if they exist, how many other supernatural myths are actually out there. It would explain a lot of weird things.
Abeston

Con

First of all your whole argument seems to be loosley based on the abhorrent book that is Twilight. That in itself should make this argument null and void.

But let's break down your argument piece by piece. If you're going to hypothesize fiction to reality let me ask how many of those immortals live without getting corrupt or mad with the fact that they are nigh indestructible.

Hollywood makes them out to be what they want vampires to be, because and I'll say this slowly vampires, don't, exist.

So killing humans is ok because they need to function? Last time I checked you were Human too and for them you are food and not a romantic partner.

You keep saying "you humans" it's as if you seem to have transcended us so you're not just delusional but you have delusions of grandeur. If mythology is anything to go by nowhere in any text does it say that vampires or chdail or any other blood sucking creatures live off animal blood. Cause if that was true then there would never have been the myth of Nosferatu.

I don't know why but I have to say this again. You're delusional and hopeless so please have your head checked. Cause you're off your door hinge.
Debate Round No. 1
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by qwaszxplm 3 years ago
qwaszxplm
Personally would argued against the pro, but from the view of a debate the pro seem to have a better argument ]1;( " `51; "|||)
Posted by canis 3 years ago
canis
Well they would not be muct different from us..We farm animals and "suck" the life out of them.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Phenenas 3 years ago
Phenenas
LightTower936AbestonTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro at least actually made an argument. Con simply resorted to personal attacks, calling him "delusional and hopeless", and ignored most of his points. Pro should win.

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