Instigator / Con
3
1493
rating
17
debates
35.29%
won
Topic
#4515
mama mia
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 11 points ahead, the winner is...
Average_Person
Parameters
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- One week
- Max argument characters
- 10,000
- Voting period
- One week
- Point system
- Multiple criterions
- Voting system
- Open
Contender / Pro
14
1516
rating
25
debates
82.0%
won
Description
mama mia means gay. like bro, you wanna suck wang? vote me if you support gays
Round 1
Leviticus 20:12-13 motherfucka
1. Preamble and BOP
I as PRO will prove that mama mia is a good expression (friendly/nonoffensive to gays as CON mentions) and does not mean “gay”. Conversely, the instigator (CON) will prove both that mama mia is a bad expression and that it means “gay”. Therefore, BOP is shared.
2. Definitions
Mama mia - borrowed from Italian mammamìa, mamma mia, literally "my mother!"
3. Arguments
In this round I have one argument which shall be sufficient, proving the meaning of mama mia.
4. Meaning
Various dictionaries and forums say mama mia means “my mother”, borrowed from italian, and is an expression used in surprise, shock, anger, joy, fear, annoyance, and disappointment (even Urban dictionary and Quora) [1.1][1.2][1.3][1.4][1.5][1.6][1.7]
In fact, it is a harmless expression which can also mean to agree with someone.
No reasonable dictionary mentions that mama mia means “gay”.
Here are some examples of its usage:
“Mamma mia, cos’ha sbagliato!”
From italian pub, just meaning “Mamma mia, what a mistake”. Here it is also a harmless expression just expressing disbelief about a soccer goal. [2]
5. Refutations
I would like to refute CON’s point:
“Leviticus 20:12-13”
Let’s see what CON is referencing:
“If a man has sexual relations with his daughter-in-law, both of them are to be put to death. What they have done is a perversion; their blood will be on their own heads.” (12) [3]
“‘If a man has sexual relations with a man as one does with a woman, both of them have done what is detestable. They are to be put to death; their blood will be on their own heads.” (13) [4]
Although 13 is related to gay (man-man sexual relations), neither have anything to do with mama mia as an expression.
“motherfucka”
Incest is illegal in the United States [5].
6. Conclusions
CON has not put a point on describing the expression mama mia as bad or as gay, whereas I have described that it is a harmless expression that is said to express surprise or shock.
Sources are linked wherever applicable.
Round 2
he's wrong because mama mia is the word I use to DESCRIBE gay people. I'm saying that GAY PEOPLE are bad, not the fucking phrase "mama mia" you dork
Thanks for your round 1 argument.
I’ll immediately begin my argument with refutations
mama mia is the word I use to DESCRIBE gay people
a)You have not said that, just cited a biblical phrase in 3 words
b) You have not defined what mama mia means. As such, the appropriate dictionary definition will be used as I have described.
c) Mama mia is an interjection. It is not a verb. It cannot “describe” something other than saying something is shocking or surprising to one’s self.
Additionally, my opponent says the following:
I'm saying that GAY PEOPLE are bad
The opponent claims to do so, yet he/she just cited a biblical phrase without any explanation at all. Additionally, this is moving the goalpost as he redefines the debate topic when it is clearly “mama mia”: the title does not say anything about gay people, only the description. Therefore, the topic would be “mama mia”. Also, the description says “mama mia means gay”, so the debate isn’t even about gay people themselves.
Therefore, you have not proven that “he’s wrong”.
Conclusions:
I extend all arguments as CON has not refuted any. CON is moving the goalpost with the topic, while the debate is clearly discussing mama mia and whether it means “gay”.
Extend all arguments.
Round 3
post nose, bitch
Extending all arguments due to CON not refuting any.
Round 4
You cut that out now, or you'll go home in an ambulance.
Extend again.
Also I am already home.
Round 5
white america
Extend all args once again. Thank you for the debate, CON
Thanks for pointing that out, Devon.
r3: post nose, bitch
r4: white america
Dear Con, please note args + sources + conduct = 6/7 of your score. Not cool!
Nah I'm good. The real debate you had is a big lie. How about every debate you make is a real debate and not a troll debate. Troll debates aren't allowed.
hey assholes. vote on the real debate i had
This debate... happened... I guess.
hello voters!!!
"You cut that out now, or you'll go home in an ambulance."
um... is this allowed in a debate?