Instigator / Pro
1
1492
rating
335
debates
40.9%
won
Topic
#3761
You pick the topic.
Status
Finished
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
Winner & statistics
After 2 votes and with 1 point ahead, the winner is...
Novice_II
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 2
- Time for argument
- Two days
- Max argument characters
- 20,000
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
2
1890
rating
98
debates
93.37%
won
Description
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.
Here's a chance for you to design the platform based on your topic selection.
We'll obviously have opposing sides.
Whatever topic you choose of course, it'll fit whichever side it falls on for you in tandem with the position preset .
***THE TOPICS CANNOT BE DUPLICATE. IT'S AN AUTOMATIC FORFEITING IF THR SAME TOPIC IS CHOSEN***
Questions and concerns, leave a comment or send a message.
Round 1
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.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.
Here's a chance for you to design the platform based on your topic selection.
We'll obviously have opposing sides.
Whatever topic you choose of course, it'll fit whichever side it falls on for you in tandem with the position preset .
***THE TOPICS CANNOT BE DUPLICATE. IT'S AN AUTOMATIC FORFEITING IF THE SAME TOPIC IS CHOSEN***
Questions and concerns, leave a comment or send a message.
- Topic: "THBT the United States should make all forms of reading illegal."
Round 2
Let's see, with all reading illegal that would mean the law can't even be read. I wonder would it get to the point where this would be a non sequitur situation.
Well a topic for another lifetime I suppose.
But this topic is challenging me to argue a case for something that should be.
By this time, we should understand, no pun intended, what should and shouldn't be universally by what came out of or with the universe.
It has given us this universal law called the law of causality. This is long before the U.S. government and the laws from it, certainly long before any man made law.
So because of this, the sun should shine bright because of its size and activity. On the side of the earth it shines brightly upon, should all areas of it be lit.
So should the earth that contains land and grass based on photosynthesis and all there in to produce vegetation from all the eco elements.
Then all the beings that live should live due to living off the land, vegetation so forth and so on.
These beings thrive to construct a civilization and bring organizations with systems of control which govern.
To govern the land and the people, everything is labeled and named including the land.
This land today is referred to as the United States with its own government and systems.
Still perpetuating the universal law ongoing so forth and ever on.
Going into laws for the land and those laws behave under universal law like everything else .
They systemically operate and go into effect by another political system.
So any act permitted or prohibited by law should be as a cause of the political system.
So reading or writing should be illegal as a cause of a political system not passing a law to make it legal.
- Mall's whole round 1 argument is nonsense, and it does not even get to the point of the resolution, despite him holding the burden of proof.
So reading or writing should be illegal as a cause of a political system not passing a law to make it legal.
- We are not debating whether making laws should be legal or not, we are debating whether reading should be made illegal. Unfortunately, I don't see any arguments from pro on this. Secondly, this is untrue. The bill of rights makes reading legal in the first amendment through the freedom of speech and press. Even if there were no explicit doctrine that stated reading should be legal this does not prove it should be illegal.
- My argument is reading should be legal because it is necessary to peruse and acquire information as well as to communicate it, and it generally causes harm to no one while being essential to technology.
Not enough time to review.
Okay, so let me see exactly what the claims here are.
C1 "You had to prove reading should not be made illegal"
This is wrong, Mall holds the burden of proof.
Do you agree with this correction (yes/no)?
Public choice is forcing votes for Novice, he says writing at the start of his rfd then changes to reading as he rushes the vote.
I have actually avoided voting certain debates like this that I think Mall defeated you in as you assume too hard that your one punch responses actually cut deep into his case.
Establishing BoP is not enough, defense alone won't even beat below average debaters, it only defeats the worst at their worst.
You had to prove reading should not be made illegal and your only justification was that freedom to write and speak was legally established.
There is an art to debating lazily, you are better when you try harder. If you put in 60% more effort into these debates, Mall would be cornered.
I don't understand why you are doing this, you know what you wrote here makes no sense.
2 hours left. Please vote.
I really need a vote for this debate. 12 hours left.