Instigator / Pro
6
1471
rating
3
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#2836

Children the age of 12 should not be treated as inferior, even if they are less mature, by the government and online, compared to teenagers at the age of 13, who are just as immature.

Status
Finished

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

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
9
Better sources
0
6
Better legibility
3
3
Better conduct
3
3

After 3 votes and with 15 points ahead, the winner is...

Benjamin
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
5
Time for argument
Two weeks
Max argument characters
30,000
Voting period
Two months
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
21
1777
rating
79
debates
76.58%
won
Description

Children the age of 12 years, while may be less mature than adults, still shouldn't forbidden from rights that are given to teenagers the age of 13, who are just as immature. I don't see the difference between those ages, other than the 13 year old being labeled as 'teenagers' whereas the 12 year old is either labeled as 'kid' or 'preteen'.They shouldn't be treated as inferiors compared to teenagers the age of 13. (I am only talking about 13, excluding teenagers above the age of 13. Older teenagers are not a loophole, nice try though) On the internet, people say kids aren't allowed on the internet because it has 'mature content'. But, as mentioned above, 13 year olds are just as immature compared to 12 year olds. Don't only focus on the description nor only on the title. Both statements are applied, so I am including all of my statements, from the title AND the description.

-->
@Barney

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ragnar // Mod action: Not Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 0:5, points to CON
>Reason for Decision: See Voting Tab
>Reason for Mod Action:

Another vote where I'm not certain why it was reported. All standards are met. Maybe the sources point could have been beefed up more, but I can't justifiably nitpick anything in particular.

-->
@fauxlaw

Thank you for voting

-->
@Subaccount

The vote against your argument placed by Ragnar has been submitted for review. For obvious reasons I cannot review it. When another moderator is less busy, they'll probably get around to it.

-->
@Benjamin

You dropped a lot of points.

-->
@Barney

I forgot the email

-->
@adfadsfdfasf

Ahh... Reset the password for said email account then.

-->
@Barney

The password reset option only sends it if I have access to the email account.

-->
@adfadsfdfasf

There should be a password reset option. Plus Benjamin seems to be the type that would allow a doover (copy/paste the original rounds into a new debate, and pick up like nothing happened, and then delete the original iteration of the debate ... if going that route, I would suggest a rule of him getting the conduct point automatically).

-->
@adfadsfdfasf

Not necessarily - Benjamin forfeited a round - so you'd be equal.

-->
@Theweakeredge

But then I would lose this debate

-->
@adfadsfdfasf

You could just make a new debate

-->
@Barney
@Theweakeredge
@Wagyu
@Benjamin

I forgot the password for that account. Shall I state my argument here?

-->
@Subaccount

Voters, DO NOT count my round 4 arguments a forfeit, because I was only following PRO's own pleading.

PRO personally asked me to wait until the last moment before posting my argument.

Round 4 argument:

--PRO has not supported his resolution with any expert sources, he has just given his personal opinion and made emotional assertions.

--I on the other hand have shown the resolution to be false and backed my position with expert evidence and concise logical syllogism's.

-->
@Subaccount

A BoP is what we call a burden of proof - whenever somebody makes a claim which is disputable, they have a "burden" to provide evidence of the claim.

-->
@Benjamin

That is not the debate. I am claiming that children the age of 12 should not be viewed as inferior to 13 year olds.

-->
@Wagyu
@Subaccount

Very well. You claim that age is not a factor in mental maturity. Let's see how you fare against a slightly older opponent.

I do not believe that kids should be mistreated for their age either. What is the issue.

I do not believe that kids should be mistreated for their age either. What is the issue.

-->
@Wagyu

That's not what I meant, I was just saying that on the internet kids shouldn't be mistreated for their age. I never said anything about child abuse.

-->
@Subaccount

I don't think you get the fact that I do not condone abusing children. I simply saw an opportunity to exploit your poor resolution. I'm not to sure why you have created this debate, as it there is hardly any controversy that 12 year old's should not be abused. I also recommend you change your current resolution to "Children the age of 12 should not be treated as inferior, even if they are less mature, by the government and online, compared to teenagers at the age of 13" as adding "who are just as mature" is sneaking in a premise which could be debated.

I don't think there should be an age restriction as to who can join DART. If your smart and 12, I'd rather have you on here than a 13 year old troll.

-->
@Subaccount

You could tag him in a post, or message him directly.

Maybe User_2006 vs CaptainSceptic could give you some ideas.

-->
@Barney

Can you message Wagyu and tell him to be the enemy?

Good luck with the revised debate setup!