David

"Oh come on, I'm merely pointing out that higher order mammals have to ensure their society's sustained survival in order to ensure the adept individual's sustained survival.
Eugenics was based on racial disparities not homeostatic maintenance and sustainability of the immediate society."

This is wrong. Based on this logic it would be morally permissible to kill those who are disabled or those who are "unfit.' The "undesirables" hurt the overall "homeostatic" nature of the rest of society.

If you’re argument inherently has some rebuttals attaches I’m perfectly OK with it.

Sounds good. Looking forward to the argument. I hope we can finally have a good debate!

Also are you pro life? Taking your views to its logical conclusion it would appear that abortion would be immoral.

Kinda curious if you think smoking is immoral? It’s obvciously harmful to yourself and those around you.

That line of reason was pretty much responsible for eugenics and an attempt to create a ‘master race’ by killing those who are ‘unfit’

Interesting. Though in Darwinian Evolution it’s survival of the most adapt. It puts the individual against society.

The objective morality response was interesting. I don’t think I’ve seen an atheist affirm natural law

Yeah lol. I don’t really care. You can have the w

I'm such a fucking idiot. I posted the arguments for another debate to this one

Looks like an interesting topic. I agree with pro. Would be interested in seeing con's response.

Can you please wait until Saturday night/Sunday to post arguments? Thanks!

Wanna accept? I know we were wanting to do a speech debate on it

Sure definitely!!

Me to! I'd hate to see a good debate go tied

Yep!

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Jboy3r // Mod action: Removed
>Points Awarded: All votes to con
>Reason for Decision: Full forfeit
>Reason for Mod Action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side, which they did.
************************************************************************

Thanks for the vote and feedback!!

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ramshutu // Mod action: Not Removed
>Points Awarded: All votes to con
>Reason for Decision: Full forfeit
>Reason for Mod Action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side, which they did not do.
************************************************************************

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: RationalMadman, armoredcat, Ramshutu // Mod action: Not Removed

>Points Awarded: All votes to con

>Reason for Decision: Full forfeit

>Reason for Mod Action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side, which they did not do.
************************************************************************

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ramshutu // Mod action: Not Removed

>Points Awarded: 7 points to Con
>Reason for Decision: Full forfeit

>Reason for Mod Action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side, which they did not do.
************************************************************************

*******************************************************************
>Reported Vote: Ramshutu // Mod action: Not Removed

>Points Awarded: 7 points to Con
>Reason for Decision: Full forfeit

>Reason for Mod Action: Full forfeit debates are not moderated unless they vote for the forfeiting side, which they did not do.
************************************************************************

Regardless if my errors were fewer you should not have awarded me that point.

I’m surprised that you can’t revote if your vote is removed. I think that’s something that should be done.

You should be able to revote if you want and just post arguments.

I feel like I should have pushed harder in the debate.

Feel free to re vote without the conduct point if you wish

For the record I think the conduct point was sufficient.

Would love to get your vote

I just read your argument. You miss one thing: DA users don’t go spamming on DI or other debate sites about how great their platform is compared to theirs. Haha. Yeah

Yeah I worded it awkwardly. Rebuttals include all rebuttals and defense is defense of your arguments and the rebuttals.

Ok cool. Thanks for the vote

Ok cool. I didn’t know people could delete their own votes. I appreciate the thorough review

«sylweb» has published a new vote for the debate «Minimum wage»

Please re vote if you can. For some reason it’s not showing up

I’m sad this was a tie

Thanks. I enjoy short debates like this sometimes

Would like some votes on this please. Short debate and shoudl be an easy vote

More characters and more rounds. Round 1 should have been arguments. It’s impossible to make a strong opening case and rebut your points in R2 with less than 1k characters.

Though ultimately I have a stronger BOP than you do

If you want we can make this a 3 round debate and just waive the fourth round

My grandfather passed away this evening. I will try to get my arguments in on time.

Fair enough. Yeah all cops are basically pigs. I don't trust the police and serious reform is needed

Fair enough. I ff’d two rounds and would hate for my opponent to have this debate a tie. Would still like argument feedback though

The debate info and stuff can be entered separately so the first round can be used for arguments instead of acceptance only

Would love some solid votes on this debate

Truth be told I don’t really believe the position I argued for. I wanted to try a devil’s advocate/foreign policy debate.

What did you think of my arguments

It’s alright. I hope we can debate again sometime

All reports are completely anonymous. We don’t even know who’s reporting it, which imo is a good thing.

please wait till sunday to post response if you can

please vote

Fair enough. I like depth.

Mind waiting till Sunday to post arguments?