Your dog is gay
All stages have been completed. The voting points distribution and the result are presented below.
Spelling and grammar points
With 3 votes and 10 points ahead, the winner is ...
- Publication date
- Last update date
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Voting system
- Open voting
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Four points
- Rating mode
- Characters per argument
~ 0 / 5,000
You cannot prove that my dog is gay. My dog is very not gay, actually.
Interpreting the Resolution:
In case anyone is confused, Sparrow is the instigator of this debate. Him referencing “your dog” in the resolution, refers to a dog other than his own. Were this debate about Sparrow’s dog, he would have written ‘my dog,’ as the English language demands. Me being the contender who answered his challenge, it is clearly my dog which is in question.
Our roles within the debate are however such that Sparrow is trying to negate the resolution, and I am trying to affirm it.
This really should not be necessary, but to avoid more cheap tactics...
Merriam-Webster defines Dog as “Canid,” which is in turn defined as: “any of a family (Canidae) of carnivorous animals that includes the wolves, jackals, foxes, coyote, and the domestic dog.”
Gay is of course a defined as “happily excited.” It is sometimes as a slang for homosexual, which is defined as “of, relating to, or characterized by a tendency to direct sexual desire toward another of the same sex.”
For proving gayness, my priority shall be on the first, but to be thorough I shall also prove the second.
My dog is named Caesar. He is a male Italian Greyhound. He is...
1. Happily Excited
He loves to run and play. His favorite toy is a red squeaky ball, which he brings into a room, squeaks it until responded to, and then runs for the joy of being chased. Occasionally he will drop it at my feet and bark, so that it may be thrown for him to chase. During both activities he is happily wagging his tail.
The love of his life is Chance, a male dachshund whom lives in the same building. He constantly licks the dog’s face, and sometimes attempts to mount him. After being pulled away, he will stand there creepily thrusting his hips for an extended amount of time (he has done this to other male dogs as well, even being removed from a daycare for repeated infractions).
Caesar does not care for female dogs, treating them almost exclusively with indifference. Even when he met a female dachshund in heat, he ignored her even while that dog’s owner and I were trying to get them to play. Thus, his preference is not merely tied to dachshunds.
You can't just arbitrarily decide what I meant by the debate title like that. You are in the pro position so you are the one making the positive claim stated in the title including the "your" part. You are the one asserting that my dog is gay.
Number one I created this debate, I know what I meant better than you do.
Number two you are simply trying to control what this debate is over, I started this debate and even posted an argument already under the pretense that this is about MY dog so by refusing to debate the topic that has already been established you are forfeiting this debate.
So far you have as good as forfeited round one. Even if we pretend this is about your dog you are clearly making what you say about him up because what are the odds that you literally just happen to have a homosexual dog? Most people don't even have dogs, you're telling me you just HAPPEN to not only have one but a relatively rare homosexual one? Also for all we know you could have your dog locked in a torture chamber, so the claim that he is gay as in joyful could also be a lie. You are the one making assertions that you can't prove no matter who's version of this debate you choose to go by.
Interpreting the Resolution (continued):
Sparrow has offered no reason for rejection of this debate taking place in English, under my interpretation of the resolution.
“You can't just arbitrarily decide what I meant by the debate title like that.”
It’s not arbitrary, it’s English. And within English it does not matter what you later wanted to have written, what matters is what you did.
“I created this debate”
He confirms that it was indeed he who wrote “your dog” in the debate resolution.
“posted an argument already”
And I refuted it, which is how debates are done.
Were first use to set a rule, within this debate I am the first one to speak of the debate resolution of “your dog,” some other “my dog” was not specified before my dog Caesar to be the specific dog in question. If anyone is in doubt, use Ctrl+F to do a word search.
“you are forfeiting this debate”
An obvious lie. Had I forfeited, there would be the word “Forfeited” in place of my above argument, icon, and timestamp. If in doubt, skim R1 of a certain other debate to see forfeiture in action.
“Even if we pretend this is about your dog”
This is Sparrow’s first use of the phrase “your dog” within this debate, and he is clearly denoting Caesar.
My Dog (continued):
To make this debate a real treat for voters, I have assembled an album of Caesar photos. They date from 2013 to 2019, and this can be easily verified (when viewing any, click the second icon from the top right to view the date they were taken).
“what are the odds that you literally just happen to have a homosexual dog?”
According to probability theory, 100%.
“Most people don't even have dogs”
No where in those photos is your dog acting gay in any way, and you are the one supporting the positive claim in the debate title meaning you are the one asserting "your dog is gay" as in my dog who is not gay.
Interpreting the Resolution (concluded):
Sparrow has dropped my case, opting to instead demonstrate the argument by repetition and argument by assertion fallacies.
Plus, he again uses the phrase “your dog” in reference to Caesar, verifying it as a valid interpretation he would make ad nauseam.
My Dog (concluded):
Earlier Sparrow inferred I was lying about owning a dog. With the proof of gay dog ownership now uncontested (the photos provided), the very objection to my gay behavioral testimony is dropped.
On a comedic note... Within the confines of this debate, there is exclusively testimony about gay dogs. We lack so much as the name of any non-gay dog, leaving us without evidence to suggest if non-gay dogs might exist.
“No where in those photos...”
This is clearly a request by Sparrow for the audience to review the Caesar photos again.
1. Happily Excited
I will not post dog pornography (not sure if the COC prohibits it, but I have moral objections), but review of the photos should show Caesar engaging in various stereotypical homosexual behaviors. He surrounds himself with a high number of pink toys (my favorite is the Pegasus). And he wears various outfits, to include an outright flaming cape.
This is in addition to my testimony no longer being challenged as evidence. For reference:
The love of his life is Chance, a male dachshund whom lives in the same building. He constantly licks the dog’s face, and sometimes attempts to mount him. After being pulled away, he will stand there creepily thrusting his hips for an extended amount of time.
Due to voting issues on this site, a few reminders for if awarding points in each category...
Name at least one argument offered by each debater, and why on balance why you chose the awardee (basically repeat this for everything else).
Name at least one source and why it impacted the debate (the photos or probability theory for example), and also the absence of counter evidence.
This should be tied. But for future reference: If ever trying to award it, remember to name why one side was better and the other worse (contrasting each side is required, even if it seems obvious from an overwhelming number of mistakes vs a clean and easy to follow case supported with great formatting).
I also don’t suggest awarding it for this case, but as a rule name at least the worst sin committed by each side (even if one committed none, admin requires them being nice to be listed). For this debate, Sparrow accusing me of animal cruelty (“you could have your dog locked in a torture chamber”), vs. me giving him an English lesson which should have come from his teachers and parents long ago.