Instigator / Pro
0
1500
rating
1
debates
0.0%
won
Topic
#4376
Dime una razón válida para la homofóbia.
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 2 points ahead, the winner is...
Bella3sp
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 3
- Time for argument
- Two hours
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Con
2
1524
rating
54
debates
74.07%
won
Description
No information
Round 1
Forfeited
DISCLAIMER: I am playing devil's advocate, I am highly against homophobia. I believe people shouldn’t be homophobic. Right now, all I want to gain from this is more opinions on the controversy.
Thanks/Gracias Juan4108,
Scroll down for the translation. That said, i'll keep this short until the instigator shows up.
Desplácese hacia abajo para ver la traducción. Dicho esto, seré breve hasta que aparezca el instigador.
Preamble:
I will be proving three contentions to prove their is a valid reason to be homophobic.
Burden of Proof:
BoP relies on the contender, con. Con needs to provide a valid reason while as pro needs to disprove these ‘valid’ reasons.
Should con provide at the minimum one valid reason to be homophobic they win this debate.
Should pro disprove of all valid
Definitions:
The homophobia definition is the fear, hatred, discomfort, with, or mistrust of people who are homosexual.
This definition can be challenged if you have one that is superior, of course.
Once again, this definition can be challenged if you have one that is superior.
Contentions
1. Discomfort
Everyone has their comforts and discomforts, maybe they disapprove of the same gender kissing. It discomforts them to see others kissing. Maybe their religion disproves of homosexuality therefore they disprove of it, hence finding discomfort from homosexuals.
2. Mistrust
Is mostly everyone homophobic at first?
First off, almost everyone is 'homophobic' at first. Most people don't trust others right off the bat, it takes time. So, per say I was talking with a coworker and they were homosexual. I wouldn't trust them enough for mostly anything, overall I would be 'mistrusting'. This applies for many people, does this mean were almost all homophobic? Anyone should be allowed to be mistrusting of another and it's not up to you or me.
3. Emo
Let's say i'm emo, I hate everyone including homosexuals.
What can you possibly say against this? Are you denying the 'emo-ness' of people?
TRANSLATION IN SPANISH:
(All of this will be done by DeepL Translator, I am not completely fluent with Spanish)
Disclaimer: Estoy haciendo de abogado del diablo, estoy muy en contra de la homofobia. Creo que la gente no debería ser homofóbica. En este momento, todo lo que quiero obtener de esto es más opiniones sobre la controversia.
Preámbulo:
Probaré tres argumentos para demostrar que hay una razón válida para ser homofóbico.
Carga de la prueba:
BoP se basa en el contendiente, con. Con tiene que proporcionar una razón válida, mientras que pro tiene que refutar estas razones "válidas".
Si con proporciona al menos una razón válida para ser homófobo, gana este debate.
Si pro refuta todas las razones válidas
Definiciones:
La definición de homofobia es el miedo, odio, incomodidad, con, o desconfianza hacia las personas que son homosexuales.
Esta definición puede ser cuestionada si se tiene una que sea superior, por supuesto.
1no tener confianza o seguridad en : SOSPECHAR2dudar de la verdad, validez o eficacia de
Una vez más, esta definición puede ser cuestionada si usted tiene una que sea superior.
Alegaciones
1. Malestar
Cada uno tiene sus comodidades e incomodidades, quizá desaprueben que se besen personas del mismo sexo. Les incomoda ver a otros besándose. Tal vez su religión desaprueba la homosexualidad, por lo tanto la desaprueban, de ahí que encuentren incomodidad en los homosexuales.
2. Desconfianza
¿Es casi todo el mundo homófobo al principio?
En primer lugar, casi todo el mundo es "homófobo" al principio. La mayoría de la gente no confía en los demás de buenas a primeras, lleva su tiempo. Por ejemplo, digamos que estoy hablando con un compañero de trabajo y es homosexual. No me fiaría lo suficiente de ellos para casi nada, en general sería 'desconfiado'. Esto se aplica a mucha gente, ¿significa esto que casi todos somos homófobos? Cualquiera puede desconfiar de otro y no depende de ti o de mí.
3. Emo
Digamos que soy emo, odio a todo el mundo, incluidos los homosexuales.
¿Qué puedes decir en contra de esto? ¿Estás negando la "emotividad" de las personas?
Translation/Traducción: https://www.deepl.com/translator
--
Sources/Fuentes:
Round 2
Forfeited
Extend.
TRANSLATION IN SPANISH:
Extender.
Round 3
Forfeited
Extend & end.
TRANSLATION IN SPANISH:
Extender & terminar.
"Were this a 4-measures voting count, he probably wouldn't say so. The forseeable reason I can see the construction of this sentence is that taking or leaving a conduct point does not affect CON winning because Pro said basically nothing at all."
My bad, I take things a bit seriously sometimes. I simply was wondering for future reference if my opponent weren't to forfeit. Besides that, thanks for confirming.
--
"Needless to say, that is possibly the best execution I have seen on this topic. Hating all people equally including homosexuals never even crossed my mind, or the mind of several others before who would rather argue this position from a religo-societal standpoint."
At least I know it wasn't the worst idea. I appreciate the comment. My entire idea was thinking outside of common presented points, for the most part, as of which is why I accepted this debate for the opinions of another. However I can't say there weren't flaws with posting that part of the argument. I just not really, but did know it couldn't be countered based on how I felt my opponent wrote their resolution.
Needless to say, that is possibly the best execution I have seen on this topic. Hating all people equally including homosexuals never even crossed my mind, or the mind of several others before who would rather argue this position from a religo-societal standpoint.
Were this a 4-measures voting count, he probably wouldn't say so. The forseeable reason I can see the construction of this sentence is that taking or leaving a conduct point does not affect CON winning because Pro said basically nothing at all.
Yeah I was just kidding. The scoring of debates is not a part of the portion of the COC that was just voted on
Yeah, i'm not much into heavy amounts of joking around in my debates.
That said, are you serious about losing a conduct point? I'm not sure if you're serious or not. If so, where does the CoC state that? Unless I forgot it while skimming the CoC.
You did well in the limited time you had my stupid jokes aside. It was fun to read
No longer allowed to play devils advocate guys! Funny. Guess I just won't say anything next time.
How do you define homophobia?