Instigator / Con
1
1523
rating
1
debates
100.0%
won
Topic
#1051

Gay Pride

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Winner
1
0

After 1 vote and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...

debater445
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
One day
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two weeks
Point system
Winner selection
Voting system
Open
Contender / Pro
0
1687
rating
555
debates
68.11%
won
Description

Things to note:
1. This is not at all an attack on people who are sexually abnormal/queer. This debate is about Gay Pride itself.
2. Both debaters have the burden of proof for their argument.
3. Pro believes Gay Pride is good for the LGBT community, as well as society, and must prove why.
4. Con believes Gay Pride is bad for the LGBT community, as well as society, and must prove why.

Criterion
Con
Tie
Pro
Points
Winner
1 point(s)
Reason:

Con round 1 is basically that Pride is being forced on people and that is causing substantial push back.

Con also argued that people are people and should be judged by their accomplishments and similarities not their differences.

While con set up this argument simply, and it could be easily knocked out of the park; pro largely ignored cons entire case.

Pro made a few assertions that gays shouldn’t have to bend for bigots; the middle paragraph of his opening seemed largely irrelevant to cons case: the finale was not much better, with con claiming that gay pride can only be beneficial with little reason I can see for him to conclude it.

I wanted to see a clear and concise explanation of what Pride is about, what relevance it has, and why the push back should be ignored.

Con continues by emphasizing that pride gives the impression it is trying to demand special treatment; and that as society is not yet fully ready, apparently for gay people - the open push of pride is a bad thing. To be honest this is all a bit of a stretch here and didn’t add much to the opening point.

The final round from con was more constructive, that pride should be about celebrating similarities; rather than aggressively highlighting differences.

Again - in the final round pro completely misses this point con was making; and produces two quotes that pro gives no context for, description of or associated argument. If pro doesn’t offer an argument, I can’t weigh the quotes as con is NOT debating against Chris Hanna.

I don’t think cons argument is great or even particularly valid; and to be clear I view this as a pretty typical boiler plate right wing argument hinges on misrepresentation , and one based on a position of largely ignorance that really doesn’t understand either the nature or detail of gay pride or the issues at work.

Saying this; pro had the easiest possible case to make that I would have accepted: use an equally boiler plate left wing argument to explain the history of pride, that it isn’t forced on society, and to express that the push back isn’t caused by pride, but caused by inherent bigotry that wouldn’t go away if gay people hide away - or any one of a number of trivial arguments he could have produced.

However pro does not do that, and mostly avoids making an argument that is relevant to cons case at all; or that even goes into any particularly depth on pride.

Because of this - I have to give this to con