The Instigator
backwardseden
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
jackotac
Con (against)
Winning
1 Points

Trump Demands End to Flag Burning as Protests Rage, Statues Fall

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...
jackotac
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/24/2020 Category: Politics
Updated: 4 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 170 times Debate No: 125527
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

backwardseden

Pro

According to Newsweek:
Amid deep unrest that has prompted the toppling of historic statutes and violent clashes between protestors and police, President Donald Trump has revived a long-standing debate over whether it should be legal to burn the American flag in public displays.

"We ought to come up with legislation that if you burn the American flag you go to jail for one year, " Trump said to applause during a campaign rally in Tulsa, Oklahoma, On Saturday. "We oughta do it. They talk about Freedom of Speech"I'm a big believer in Freedom of Speech"but that's desecration. That's a terrible thing they're doing. "

Yeah, This is me backwardseden saying this.
No you silly little worthless piece of Coocoo poofs retardation from the backwards can of his spewing jar, These people are protesting against YOU AND POLICE. And btw, What are YOU going to do about it? Start arresting people to further p**s them off? Great going in being a true leader of this country who deliberately spreads Covid-19.
-----
It's not the first time Trump has called for a ban on burning the American flag, Which the U. S. Supreme Court deemed protected symbolic speech in rulings three decades ago.

But ongoing protests that broke out after the killing of George Floyd in Minnesota, "which have included multiple American flag burning demonstrations just yards from the White House"have thrust the issue back onto the list of Trump's chief grievances.

He urged Congress on Twitter late Tuesday evening to "do something about the lowlifes that burn the American Flag. "

"It should be stopped, And now! " he wrote.
-----
You are the ab-so-lute worst of the worst Donald Trump, You coughed upped disease maggot lard, Easily the worst president of all time. Yep. By this very nature as you try to escalate things rather than even thinking about bringing about peace. Nah.
-----
Several lawmakers through the years have proposed Constitutional amendments to get around the Supreme Court's decision and officially make flag burning and other desecration illegal, But none has ever gotten enough support to be passed onto states to consider for adoption.

https://www. Newsweek. Com/trump-demands-end-flag-burning-protests-rage-statues-fall-1513201? Utm_source=pushnami&utm_medium=Push_Notifications&utm_campaign=automatic
jackotac

Con

So I don't know if anyone ever told you this but you don't have to post the whole article to the debate. You can just link it and I'll read it. This site also doesn't allow direct links so if you can't get the link to work just post the title, Publisher, And article. That's sufficient.

Now that that's out of the way lets get to you're first point which seems to be directed directly at Trump which is pretty new for me. I can't really defend Trumps views but I would like to point out that the president could in fact enforce laws if they were passed. I would say that I don't support it becoming a law but I would also say that the act of burning a flag is indicative of violent overthrow rather than peaceful protest. I really don't think I need to elaborate on why I think violence is bad.

Your second point is that Trump willfully spread the corona virus. I don't think you have evidence to support that claim. Patient zero has yet to come forward but the origin of the virus has been traced to China and there is some serious speculation that it was intentional. (Forbes - did covid 19 come from a lab? Was It Deliberate Bioterrorism? A Biodefense Expert Explores The Clues) If you want to blame Trump for being unprepared that's one thing but the simple fact is our economy won't last much longer if we don't leave the house and work.

Frankly I hate how much you're having me defend Trump. If you burn down buildings, Assassinate police, And tear down statues then nobody is going to respect your cause. You don't truly believe your going to make me think I don't need a peace army by acting more violent? Not to mention police forces aren't nationalized. If the police in your city suck you just have to petition the lowest level of government to change that. Police forces are hired and funded by cities. There are some state and federal police but I don't think they're the ones you're having a problem with. So blaming the national government for your local police is clearly dumb and very ineffective. If you want to be effective then protest your local sheriff. "Sheriffs are not police and have many different responsibilities. Sheriffs are elected officials where the head of police is appointed or hired in. "( Wikipedia- Law enforcement in the United States )
Debate Round No. 1
backwardseden

Pro

"So I don't know if anyone ever told you this but you don't have to post the whole article to the debate. "
You must be a cherry-picker-pecker-picker-pucker-upper-super-stuffer that opens his maw wide to a garbage disposal to say "Ahhhh I'm completely ignorant and arrogant unto the unknown wooden world of scabs. " because you either CAN'T READ or didn't BOTHER to READ. So which is it, BOY?
Yeah don't you worry in your extreme shredded ape outfit, The entire article, In nowhere near its entirety, Was posted to this esteemed and correct, Righteous, And just debate showing that Donald manure spread Trump, Easily the worst president of all time, Is a cowpie kewpie doll anal rectum spit doll of complete and total worthlessness in all of his hourglass display in his window of botox that is a requirement that needs to be neutered for its enraged display.

Oh and btw, I did provide the link. I also provided the title. Are you really THIS stupid? I guess you are. Since you are, This debate is now over. I have no desire to rummage through your complete moron's utter lack of a complete intellect and edumacation. I'm too good for you. You 100% proved it.
On the other hand, If you wish to apologize for your stupidity, Arrogance, Lack of understanding, That you don't know a single thing in this world, How insulting you are to my intelligence, Then this debate can continue. If not, Then don't even bother with another argument because you will have thus proven yourself to be dumber and more of an idiot than Donald boy toy cabbage batbrain Trump, If that's possible.
jackotac

Con

I'm just trying to help you with you're debating technique cause it's actually very helpful to just talk on points. Points that support a causes. Both of which were unclear because of your writing and debating style. They're still very unclear because all you do is use overuse adjectives.

So I don't have to defend Trump to disprove your points of flag burning and toppling statues. I can also quote areas of active insurrection and make the claim that people aren't protesting they're rioting. See it isn't a matter of one side being right and another side being wrong. Both sides are wrong. As an individual with his own agency I can see and act on both evils myself without divulging into a name calling.

So I see now I might have come off a little condescending when I asked you to write your sources in a different way. That wasn't my intention. You see the site we're using will actually blocks external links. So I was able to find the article you used but I had to put it into a search engine first. I'm just saying it would be more efficient to use the older style of referencing since I cannot directly send you a link to the article.

If you leave the debate I will win. So thanks for an easy victory I guess? Why would I apologize? I haven't been profane and I've done nothing if not build bridges. You haven't even responded to my points. Why would I apologize when you can't even defend you're views to the most basic of criticism. Furthermore, Why even get on a debate site if you didn't wish to have your views challenged?
Debate Round No. 2
backwardseden

Pro

"I'm just trying to help you with you're debating technique. . . "
You are not anywhere near smart enough, Nor are you in any possible way edumacated enough to do as such. And besides, There's nothing wrong with my debating technique. It works just fine, Especially for outhouse jockeys like you who think and believe that they know everything to everything that there is to 0 divided by 0 especially when you hold a rubberband pointed directly at your you know where areas with rotted gumballs.

"So I don't have to defend Trump. . . "
Well OK. Then don't because you can't. So further action is shown on your part to thus end this debate. Bye twinkletoes.
jackotac

Con

It's confusing cause the you were quoting something without quotation marks. That's why you had to identify yourself "yeah this is me. " Just use quotations and use references properly. I know its an online debate but if we were debating in person or in a more academic manner all I'd have to do to discredit your source is say the link didn't work. That's why I suggested the change. If you don't want to take good advice that's your own fault.

To quote myself in full I said "So I don't have to defend Trump to disprove your points of flag burning and toppling statues. " I don't know what you don't understand about that. Seems like a very dishonest way of portraying your point. Not to mention you didn't do anything to defend your idea that flag burning and toppling statues was ok. You didn't defend the protesters as peaceful or anything to prove the rioters were justified. You literally didn't make any points. You asserted something and then made character attacks. That's not debating. That's throwing a temper tantrum online. Good luck proving your side is legitimate with tactics like that. I'm sure people are really going to listen to that.
Debate Round No. 3
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 3 months ago
dsjpk5
backwardsedenjackotacTied
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: Pro called Con a "pecker" in round two. That's poor conduct.

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