I have not changed this ever, it was implied from the very beginning, you clearly do not understand the equivocation fallacy. The definition of the equivocation fallacy is this: "equivocation is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses throughout an argument leading to a false conclusion." And I have not changed the direction of this debate and have implied the same meaning over the course of the entire debate. You have taken the title (and description) in a completely different way.
The free wins bit was a joke, :P, I'm sorry if you thought that I actually just wanted free wins. And, I did say something about if the person knows or doesn't know if he is gay, in the description (if you didn't see it). "Are LGBTQ people actually who they say they are? Yes. "
Yes, because the debate title was "Is sexual orientation determined AT birth". Lol, free wins am I right? But, his point was that children decide their "gayness" at puberty which is years ahead of being one second old. So, he DID still concede. So, I win. yay.
My side on this debate doesn't mean that I am homosexual, it just proves that I think that you can't be decided as straight, or even gay at birth. You have to decide over time. Women are not met to be with men, and vice versa.
I am pro-LGBTQ, which means I think that people can decide their gender/sexual orientation NOT during birth. Which means that I do NOT think sexual orientation always has to be determined at birth. I am Con-Sexual orientation is determined at birth and Pro-LGBTQ. If you need more clarification, I would be happy to explain more deeply.
You ignore science, and you ignore the TRUE words of Neil deGrasse Tyson, who said that the earth wasn't flat. He is a respectable scientist, and you are truly insane.
I was going to create a debate about this, but I knew some random over-religious dude was going to use religious facts to beat real physical facts. So, I would like to see how this debate would turn out. But, I don't think religion can beat over science so the earth is not flat.
"I’m only perplexed ‘bout how your bars are so bad
Compared to you, Lil Tay’s a fucking rap god
If you’re a T-Rex, bitch, then my name is Godzilla
Step out of my way, I’m a dinosaur killer! "
NOTHING RHYMES IN THERE
bad doesn't rhyme with god
Godzilla doesn't rhyme with killer.
Plus if you are a dinosaur killer, you're killing yourself (if you're Godzilla)
@Alec, according to an (I researched this topic for my thesis, but then I somehow got into being a Financial Manager?), interview I did with Dr. Tara Drozdenko of the Outrider Foundation, she stated " Most countries with nuclear weapons rely on them to intimidate other countries into not attacking. This is called "deterrence" because you are deterring your adversaries with the threat of nuclear retaliation. Deterrence works for the most part. But, the problem is we have had many times where we almost accidentally stumbled into nuclear war. In those cases, we didn't avoid nuclear war because our adversaries were deterred. We avoided it by chance. It was just luck that kept us from war...the only way to be sure to avoid nuclear war is to no longer have nuclear weapons."
I just wrote 2 raps in under 50 minutes so BOOM!
IDK
Lol piecing together a rap in 20 minutes is harder than it looks.
THE TIME IS NOW
Ohhh, so the Wikipedia article is your source. Sorry
lol, you read my mind.
Whoops, forgot to add this to my argument. My opponent hasn't stated his sources for his study.
So, technically, you can be gay before birth.
I have not changed this ever, it was implied from the very beginning, you clearly do not understand the equivocation fallacy. The definition of the equivocation fallacy is this: "equivocation is an informal fallacy resulting from the use of a particular word/expression in multiple senses throughout an argument leading to a false conclusion." And I have not changed the direction of this debate and have implied the same meaning over the course of the entire debate. You have taken the title (and description) in a completely different way.
Determined means to "firmly decide" or "DECIDE".
And, as I said, we are talking about the point of which they know if they are gay. So, as you said, they do not know that they are gay.
Do you really think that babies actually know that they are gay, from the moment they are born?
The free wins bit was a joke, :P, I'm sorry if you thought that I actually just wanted free wins. And, I did say something about if the person knows or doesn't know if he is gay, in the description (if you didn't see it). "Are LGBTQ people actually who they say they are? Yes. "
Yes, because the debate title was "Is sexual orientation determined AT birth". Lol, free wins am I right? But, his point was that children decide their "gayness" at puberty which is years ahead of being one second old. So, he DID still concede. So, I win. yay.
I'm sorry, I may have to post my argument at the last minute because of personal stuff, I'm going to a funeral :( , and/maybe forfeit one round.
Yes
My side on this debate doesn't mean that I am homosexual, it just proves that I think that you can't be decided as straight, or even gay at birth. You have to decide over time. Women are not met to be with men, and vice versa.
I am pro-LGBTQ, which means I think that people can decide their gender/sexual orientation NOT during birth. Which means that I do NOT think sexual orientation always has to be determined at birth. I am Con-Sexual orientation is determined at birth and Pro-LGBTQ. If you need more clarification, I would be happy to explain more deeply.
The votes are the voter's opinion. Please stop trying to game the system so you can win.
VOTE pls
You ignore science, and you ignore the TRUE words of Neil deGrasse Tyson, who said that the earth wasn't flat. He is a respectable scientist, and you are truly insane.
I was going to create a debate about this, but I knew some random over-religious dude was going to use religious facts to beat real physical facts. So, I would like to see how this debate would turn out. But, I don't think religion can beat over science so the earth is not flat.
Just because you are losing, doesn't mean that the teammate created a fake account. That is called bad sportsmanship.
I didn't create a new account. My 13 year brother got "Samthekoolkid" and "Bobsondodson" to join debateart.com
What do you mean?
"I’m only perplexed ‘bout how your bars are so bad
Compared to you, Lil Tay’s a fucking rap god
If you’re a T-Rex, bitch, then my name is Godzilla
Step out of my way, I’m a dinosaur killer! "
NOTHING RHYMES IN THERE
bad doesn't rhyme with god
Godzilla doesn't rhyme with killer.
Plus if you are a dinosaur killer, you're killing yourself (if you're Godzilla)
Thanks, I updated the debate.
I didn't post because, SOMEONE was hogging the computer all night
@Dr.Franklin
Sorry about that
I didn't realize it
@Dr.Franklin,
I want some new people (like me) to vote. The more votes, the better.
@Alec, according to an (I researched this topic for my thesis, but then I somehow got into being a Financial Manager?), interview I did with Dr. Tara Drozdenko of the Outrider Foundation, she stated " Most countries with nuclear weapons rely on them to intimidate other countries into not attacking. This is called "deterrence" because you are deterring your adversaries with the threat of nuclear retaliation. Deterrence works for the most part. But, the problem is we have had many times where we almost accidentally stumbled into nuclear war. In those cases, we didn't avoid nuclear war because our adversaries were deterred. We avoided it by chance. It was just luck that kept us from war...the only way to be sure to avoid nuclear war is to no longer have nuclear weapons."
@Ragnar and @Michael_Hastings, I am supporting the side that is against nukes.
Your turn...