Instigator / Pro
0
1325
rating
48
debates
13.54%
won
Topic

Support same sex marriage, endorse incestuous marriage just the same.

Status
Finished

All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.

Arguments points
0
3
Sources points
0
2
Spelling and grammar points
0
1
Conduct points
0
1

With 1 vote and 7 points ahead, the winner is ...

Intelligence_06
Parameters
More details
Publication date
Last update date
Category
People
Time for argument
Two days
Voting system
Open voting
Voting period
One week
Point system
Four points
Rating mode
Rated
Characters per argument
10,000
Contender / Con
7
1668
rating
43
debates
79.07%
won
Description
~ 859 / 5,000

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.
Quite straightforward, Take one with the other. It's a package deal. You can demonstrate the differences and we can put them to the test.
We can find out whether these differences have to stand in the way of happiness. Why not support these two types of marriages? What exception could there be?
For clarity or questions, Please send a message or comment prior to accepting debate.

Added:
Criterion
Pro
Tie
Con
Points
Better arguments
3 point(s)
Better sources
2 point(s)
Better spelling and grammar
1 point(s)
Better conduct
1 point(s)
Reason:

I hate giving 7-points, as it feels like a votebomb, even when it isn't.

So con swiftly demonstrated harm to future generations caused by incest, and pointed to the lack of any harm caused by gay marriage. Therefore to support one does not mean you should support the other, and implicitly it is not necessary to support the other (I liked the pen/gun and popper/landmine analogy).

Pro on the other hand insisted that not all children from incest have birth defects, and that it's technically possible to support both groups on the same grounds.

ARG: con for the above.

SOURCES: Con's sources were vastly better than the absence of sources. The one pointing to a 42% birth defect rate among incest was particularly good, and proved the basis for his argument.

S&G: ALL CAPS FOR SEVERAL PARAGRAPHS. Seriously pro, you've been told about this repeatedly.

CONDUCT: Pro implicitly accused con of "fussing, whining, screaming or crying." And pretty directly that con is mentally "SLOW" for disagreeing with pro. Insulting the other debater for taking the requested stance, is unsportsmanlike. It would be akin to playing chess, and calling the other player a genocidal racist for killing so many blacks (or vice versa).