NationStates Jolt Archive

Okay, here's how the game is played:

Pick a topic that has been debated ad nauseum, like gay marriage or communism vs. capitalism.

You will be arguing the side that you normally oppose.

HOWEVER. You must come up with an argument that you have NEVER seen used before.

Points will be awarded based on the following elements:

1) Creativity (how original is your argument?)
2) Style/presentation (how well did you express your argument?)
3) Technical merit (how well does your argument hold up? It's okay if your premises are silly, as long as the structure of the argument is solid.)

I do that all the time...

Does that count?

Example:

(Topic=gay adoption. Position=con)

"Gays should be prohibited from rearing children because homosexuals are more likely to rear their children in homes that are tastefully decorated in soothing earth tones. Research has established that color of one's environment will have a significant impact on one's temperment and mood. If we are to breed a new generation of super-soldiers who will protect us against the Muslims and feminists, we will need children to be reared in jarring environments full of harsh bright colors. This will help them to grow up appropriately rage-filled and anxious. We can then channel this distress into military fervor."

Example:

(Topic=gay adoption. Position=con)

"Gays should be prohibited from rearing children because homosexuals are more likely to rear their children in homes that are tastefully decorated in soothing earth tones. Research has established that color of one's environment will have a significant impact on one's temperment and mood. If we are to breed a new generation of super-soldiers who will protect us against the Muslims and feminists, we will need children to be reared in jarring environments full of harsh bright colors."

ok thats quite good

Great idea for a thread and you are quite good at it. Not sure if I can manage though.:fluffle: Good luck though.

All medical testing on animals should be banned, no matter how many human lives the results could save or improve. This is because rabbits have never tested drugs to fight cancer or relieve severe pain and suffering on me or any other human.

i play devils advocate all the time but no-one can tell so i end up getting opinions attributed to me that aren't mine (in real life anyway, i don't think anyone really cares what individuals opinions are on here), then i get accused of forgetting what i was talking about. doesn't help that i have a reputation for poor memory as well.

All medical testing on animals should be banned, no matter how many human lives the results could save or improve. This is because rabbits have never tested drugs to fight cancer or relieve severe pain and suffering on me or any other human.
How about:

"Medical testing on animals should be banned, because lab animals are being allowed access to many of our most top-secret projects. If we allow the rabbits to see what we're working on, they'll smuggle that information out to the Bunny High Command, and pretty soon they'll have overthrown us using our own technology!"

How about:

"Medical testing on animals should be banned, because lab animals are being allowed access to many of our most top-secret projects. If we allow the rabbits to see what we're working on, they'll smuggle that information out to the Bunny High Command, and pretty soon they'll have overthrown us using our own technology!"

Or Don't do animal testing because come the Bunny Revolution they'll do to you what you did to them?:fluffle: :cool: :D

How about:

"Medical testing on animals should be banned, because lab animals are being allowed access to many of our most top-secret projects. If we allow the rabbits to see what we're working on, they'll smuggle that information out to the Bunny High Command, and pretty soon they'll have overthrown us using our own technology!"

Another reason that medical testing on animals should be banned is that it's unfair: why should some rat recieve cutting-edge drugs and treatment over humans?

Another reason that medical testing on animals should be banned is that it's unfair: why should some rat recieve cutting-edge drugs and treatment over humans?
Oooooh, I like this one! :)

Another reason that medical testing on animals should be banned is that it's unfair: why should some rat recieve cutting-edge drugs and treatment over humans?

Verry well said

Subject: Iraq War / Position: Pro

"I fully support the war in Iraq to fulfill our glorious, divine sanctioned leader's wishes for vengeance against a foe that we know for a fact threatened to kill his father. I also look forward to all of the oil that we will plunder from this Pagan land, and the business that will result from the cheap labor taken from "enemy combantant" camps."

"...and pretty soon they'll have overthrown us using our own technology!"

Does this mean they'll give us operations to make us incontinent? :eek:

SEXIEST ANYTHING

There's ALWAYS a 'sexiest' whatever thread... URGH

I say we have an ugliest thread

Because it's important to know that the validity & credibility of someone’s post is judged on their degree of aesthetic pleasing ability

:cool:

Homosexuality, con.

"It is clear that homosexual sex is vastly superior to any other kind of sexual interaction. The men are better looking, the women are more sexually veracious and they both stick to the equipment they know how to squeeze (and suck and poke and cajole) the most out of. Heterosexuality can never hope to compete! Sure, maybe two out of all the times heterosexuals have sex they end up having babies they don't really want to have anyway, but who wouldn't give that up for a delicious bit of sodomy or some scented candles in one's own lesbian bookstore? It's just bloody unfair how the homos got so much and the heteros got so little. Ergo, to save heterosexuality and to pretend it is needed for procreation, homosexuality must be stopped."

Homosexuality, con.

"It is clear that homosexual sex is vastly superior to any other kind of sexual interaction. The men are better looking, the women are more sexually veracious and they both stick to the equipment they know how to squeeze (and suck and poke and cajole) the most out of. Heterosexuality can never hope to compete! Sure, maybe two out of all the times heterosexuals have sex they end up having babies they don't really want to have anyway, but who wouldn't give that up for a delicious bit of sodomy or some scented candles in one's own lesbian bookstore? It's just bloody unfair how the homos got so much and the heteros got so little. Ergo, to save heterosexuality and to pretend it is needed for procreation, homosexuality must be stopped."
Splendid!

To be honest, I've got a sneaking feeling that this argument may actually hit a bit close to the truth. To hear some homophobes tell it, being gay is all about having tons of sex with many well-dressed and well-groomed partners. No wonder they want to ban homosexuality! It sound so great that you've got to wonder why anybody would do anything else! :D

To be honest, I've got a sneaking feeling that this argument may actually hit a bit close to the truth. To hear some homophobes tell it, being gay is all about having tons of sex with many well-dressed and well-groomed partners. No wonder they want to ban homosexuality!

Exactly what I was going for, so while it can be seen that I did technically break your "not an argument we've heard before" rule, I think hearing an argument as we've never heard it before is still within the spirit of the thread.

It sound so great that you've got to wonder why anybody would do anything else! :D

I've been wondering the same myself for quite some time.

Exactly what I was going for, so while it can be seen that I did technically break your "not an argument we've heard before" rule, I think hearing an argument as we've never heard it before is still within the spirit of the thread.

Yes, certainly. Since I've yet to hear any anti-gay person USE that argument.

Hell, we could really have fun with it...

"Homosexuality must be banned, because it's so much fun that people won't want to do anything else. Nobody will go to work because they're too busy having gay sex. The only businesses which will survive will be trendy nightclubs, interior design stores, and the fashion industry. The economy will crumble!!"

Abortion.

Abortion is wrong because if God wanted women to have abortions, he would have had it written in the bible.

I.. suck.. at this. :(

variation on a theme:

Homosexuality is abhorent, what gives people the right to enjoy themselves?

Abortion.

Abortion is wrong because if God wanted women to have abortions, he would have had it written in the bible.

I.. suck.. at this. :(

yes

yes you d0

the bible wasn't written by jesus, it was written by some guy with long hair interpreting the events around him

can you say BIAS?

Abortion.

Abortion is wrong because if God wanted women to have abortions, he would have had it written in the bible.

I.. suck.. at this. :(
Here, let me try...

"Every year, countless lamps are broken when PMSing women throw them at the heads of their jackass boyfriends. Our national stockpiles of chocolate are also severely depleted by the ravenous cravings of women with PMS. To protect our nation, we must put an end to PMS. Women who are pregnant do not get their periods, and therefore cannot experience PMS. Abortion should be banned because it causes women to stop being pregnant, and therefore allows their period to return...bringing with it the dreaded PMS."

Contraception: Con

Contraception should be outlawed because every woman that kills her baby (yes, contraception is murder) makes one less baby born. If this continues, contraception will become the norm, and America's population will plummet. Then the rabbits, who don't use contraception, will overrun America.

Violent video games need to be banned, because that's the only way I can think of to get some people voting for me.

Here, let me try...

"Every year, countless lamps are broken when PMSing women throw them at the heads of their jackass boyfriends. Our national stockpiles of chocolate are also severely depleted by the ravenous cravings of women with PMS. To protect our nation, we must put an end to PMS. Women who are pregnant do not get their periods, and therefore cannot experience PMS. Abortion should be banned because it causes women to stop being pregnant, and therefore allows their period to return...bringing with it the dreaded PMS."
Yes!

*gives you a cookie*

Contraception: Con

Contraception should be outlawed because every woman that kills her baby (yes, contraception is murder) makes one less baby born. If this continues, contraception will become the norm, and America's population will plummet. Then the rabbits, who don't use contraception, will overrun America.
Terrific!

Violent video games need to be banned, because that's the only way I can think of to get some people voting for me.

Nonono, it's like this.

Violent video games need to be banned because they're the best kind. If we limit children to learning and puzzle solving video games, they'll go outside and excersise instead, thus being in better condition to fight the Deadly Mongol Hordes when Ghengis Khan attacks the US.

Nonono, it's like this.

Violent video games need to be banned because they're the best kind. If we limit children to learning and puzzle solving video games, they'll go outside and excersise instead, thus being in better condition to fight the Deadly Mongol Hordes when Ghengis Khan attacks the US.
Splendid!

Kyoto Protocols/Reduction in greenhouse gasses. Position: Con.


Okay, scientists believe that we're going to another Ice Age at some point, right? Well, I for one don't relish the thought of wandering the frozen wastes in a loincloth fighting with mastadons and sabertooth tigers, so we should not reduce but rather INCREASE our emissions to speed up global warming! It's our only chance of avoiding a grisly fate at the hands of a sabertooth tiger!

homosexuality con

homosexuality plus any other form of deviancy should be banned. The only way for a country to remain powerful is full there to be total and utter sexual repression. Except in the ruling elite of course. Look at Rome, Victorian Britain and everyother nation at the height of its power!!!!

animal testing con.

We must stop testing on cute bunnies! They might become resistant to the chemicals. What will we do when rabbits start breeding like crazy and chanel nº5 no longer has any affect!!!!

oh..
violent games.

Our cultures have no history of violence!!! Neither in literature, film or oral!!
our children will have no way of understanding the affects of GTA. after playing the game they will assume its alright to steal a car, run people over and have fun with prostitutes!!! they also think prison will only last 10 seconds so they assume its ok to cause crime!!!! THINK OF THE CHILDREN!!

Violent video games, what a great idea. we can secretly desensitize children so they dont notice whats happening to scocity and keep voting for us.
its win-win they're happy and so are we!

Violent videogames, con position:

"Violent videogames allow our children to vent their frustrations and rage in ways other than beating each other up. If children do not get into fights, they may experience fewer injuries. Fewer injuries means less work for school nurses. Thus, violent games must be banned in order to secure the jobs of school nurses."

Handgun ban, Pro:

We all know about the direct victims of gun violence, but have you looked at the sword industry lately? Ever since guns were introduced into society, sword-makers have experienced a steady decline in business revenues. Today, they have been reduced to making replica swords for Lord of the Ring geeks and Highlander fans. Please, save our sword industry from becoming obselete, and vote to ban handguns today.

Handgun ban, Pro:

We all know about the direct victims of gun violence, but have you looked at the sword industry lately? Ever since guns were introduced into society, sword-makers have experienced a steady decline in business revenues. Today, they have been reduced to making replica swords for Lord of the Ring geeks and Highlander fans. Please, save our sword industry from becoming obselete, and vote to ban handguns today.

you forgot crossbows

Gun control, anti:

"Guns don't kill people, it's the velocity at which the bullets travel that do! I mean, if we had bullets that ambled along like female drivers, we'd never have any gun related deaths! I say we outlaw bullets that move fast - but let me keep my harmless collection of sixty four assault rifles, eighteen grenade launchers, forty one pistols, one sniper rifle and a howitzer. I mean, these guns are designed for protecting me, not killing others!"

Handgun ban, Pro:

We all know about the direct victims of gun violence, but have you looked at the sword industry lately? Ever since guns were introduced into society, sword-makers have experienced a steady decline in business revenues. Today, they have been reduced to making replica swords for Lord of the Ring geeks and Highlander fans. Please, save our sword industry from becoming obselete, and vote to ban handguns today.
Hehehehe.

Yeah. I like it.

Intelligent Design, pro:

"We must teach ID as an alternate to evolution because it gives our children (and us adults, too) the ability to opt out of science when the concepts become too hard to understand. Take the bacterial flagellum question, for instance. I puzzle over this every day and it is simply too difficult for me to grasp, I need the possibility that it was simply designed and put in place by an extra-natural power, otherwise I can't sleep at night."

Proportional Representation; Con

The idea that democracy must be reformed to allow a more 'representative' Parliament for the people is laughable at best. Really, what is wrong with a government running our nation with dictatorial-style powers with less than half of the consent of the governed? Truly, non-representational governments work best, because it allows citizens a legitimate reason to complain about the government. Truly representative governments would only shift the blame back to the people themselves, and who wants that?

I elect to pass the buck, today!

Intelligent Design, pro:

"We must teach ID as an alternate to evolution because it gives our children (and us adults, too) the ability to opt out of science when the concepts become too hard to understand. Take the bacterial flagellum question, for instance. I puzzle over this every day and it is simply too difficult for me to grasp, I need the possibility that it was simply designed and put in place by an extra-natural power, otherwise I can't sleep at night."
Hmm...that one's a little too close to reality. :)

Proportional Representation; Con

The idea that democracy must be reformed to allow a more 'representative' Parliament for the people is laughable at best. Really, what is wrong with a government running our nation with dictatorial-style powers with less than half of the consent of the governed? Truly, non-representational governments work best, because it allows citizens a legitimate reason to complain about the government. Truly representative governments would only shift the blame back to the people themselves, and who wants that?

I elect to pass the buck, today!
Again, a bit close to real arguments. Remember, we're trying to provide a unique argument for the opposition.

For instance...

"Reforming democracy to allow a more "representative" Parliament for the people is a lousy idea. If there's one person in charge of everything, then you've only got to remember one name. If the government does something that sucks, you know who's name you should curse.

On the other hand, if you start trying to "represent" the people, you end up having to hire more people to work in the government. Then you have tons of names to remember, and you can never be quite sure which one is the one who needs to be cursed in any given situation. No, a single dictator would definitely be best."

Gay Marriage Con

Clearly, if gay marriage is allowed, it will be a huge assault on our family values. After all, how will two men decide which one goes to work, and which one stays home, does housework, and cooks dinner? Likewise two women. Therefore, their inability to decide will lead to higher amounts of arguments, and, eventually, spousal abuse. Therefore, fags are more likely to abuse their partners, and should not be allowed to marry.

Gay Marriage Con

Clearly, if gay marriage is allowed, it will be a huge assault on our family values. After all, how will two men decide which one goes to work, and which one stays home, does housework, and cooks dinner? Likewise two women.
And once again, this is an argument that is really really close to what is actually used by homophobes. The assault on "traditional gender roles" is part and parcel with the gay marriage debate.

I think it really says something about some of these positions, that their actual arguments are so funny that they actually come close to the snarky things people are making up. :)

And once again, this is an argument that is really really close to what is actually used by homophobes. The assault on "traditional gender roles" is part and parcel with the gay marriage debate.

I think it really says something about some of these positions, that their actual arguments are so funny that they actually come close to the snarky things people are making up. :)

You know what? Fine!

Gay Marriage: Con.

We cannot allow gays to marry, as then heterosexuals will not be able to compete. It's bad enough when one gay man has an inherent stereotypical fashion advantage, but if there's two gay men joined together in holy matrimony, straight men everywhere will look shabby!

The teaching of ID in schools, pro.

Evolution. An intruiging theory that seems to describe the observable facts quite nicely. Which is why many people claim it should be the only one taught in the clasroom today.
However, what these people overlook is the major drawback of teaching evolution to children: it does not provide a role model for them. They are taught that they evolved through a proces of survival of the fittest over many millenia, a proces they themselves can not influence. Why then should they make an effort to make something of their life ?

ID on the other hand has a Designer. An Intelligent Designer even. Which means he probably did well in school -which is an excellent example for our younglings. The theory also implies he created us through hard work - which again is a message they youth of today can use.

So - teach ID. Inspire children.

Contraception: Con

If people have access to contraceptives, then they are more likely to be having sex. If they're having sex, they'll feel better naturally. This will mean they'll be less likely to buy pharmaceuticals to make themselves feel better. The drug industry will take a huge loss! We can't allow people to fuck or the economy will suffer!

Issue: Christianity stance: Pro (DAMN, this is hard for me)

Christianity should be established as the one true religion worldwide, with all other religions and especially the evil atheists exiled to South Carolina. Why? Because South Carolina sucks ass. No alcohol on Sunday, no liquor sales after 7...it is truly a terrible place.

Furthermore, Christianity has been proven to be true. This one time, at band camp, this hot little red headed girl touched my penis. And she wore a cross around her neck. Therefore, Jesus is in favor of redheads touching your penis, so we MUST conclude that he exists, loves us, and wants us to be happy.

You know what? Fine!

Gay Marriage: Con.

We cannot allow gays to marry, as then heterosexuals will not be able to compete. It's bad enough when one gay man has an inherent stereotypical fashion advantage, but if there's two gay men joined together in holy matrimony, straight men everywhere will look shabby!
Hehehe!

Now that's a keeper!!

Sex toys: Con

If sex toys are legal, women will be using giant dildos. If women are using giant dildos, they'll never be satisfied with those of us with our two inch cocks. If this happens, we won't be able to get laid. If we can't get laid, fewer babies will be born.

The teaching of ID in schools, pro.

Evolution. An intruiging theory that seems to describe the observable facts quite nicely. Which is why many people claim it should be the only one taught in the clasroom today.
However, what these people overlook is the major drawback of teaching evolution to children: it does not provide a role model for them. They are taught that they evolved through a proces of survival of the fittest over many millenia, a proces they themselves can not influence. Why then should they make an effort to make something of their life ?

ID on the other hand has a Designer. An Intelligent Designer even. Which means he probably did well in school -which is an excellent example for our younglings. The theory also implies he created us through hard work - which again is a message they youth of today can use.

So - teach ID. Inspire children.
I like it, particularly because of the undercurrent of blasphemy (stay in school, kids, and you can become a god!).

Issue: USian Stance: Pro

The term 'American' should not be used to describe people from the United States of America. USian is a far superior term. Because, it shows clearly, that we are better. We all know that we are engaged in a global fight against terrorism. But what you may not know, is the UN, as well as all of Europe, Asia, Australia, South America, Canada, Mexico, and space aliens (just the grey's, but still) have all been infiltrated by Al Qaeda. And if you are not with US, then you are with THEM. And you all know who they are. So proudly show your good guy heritage. It's a war out there- US versus THEM. So be an USian.

Issue: USian Stance: Pro

The term 'American' should not be used to describe people from the United States of America. USian is a far superior term. Because, it shows clearly, that we are better. We all know that we are engaged in a global fight against terrorism. But what you may not know, is the UN, as well as all of Europe, Asia, Australia, South America, Canada, Mexico, and space aliens (just the grey's, but still) have all been infiltrated by Al Qaeda. And if you are not with US, then you are with THEM. And you all know who they are. So proudly show your good guy heritage. It's a war out there- US versus THEM. So be an USian.
Wow. I think you might have just won the thread.

:D

I like it, particularly because of the undercurrent of blasphemy (stay in school, kids, and you can become a god!).

Well.. IDers do claim it is possible to find out how God built us by studying his design... meaning that they seek to equate their knowledge to that of God.
And be honest -the promise of Godhood *is* inspiring.

Freedom of Speech - con

Quite often, when people are protesting and saying those things we don't like to hear, they are using some sort of amplification system, and it is usually turned up too loud. Most communities have noise ordinances that are meant to protect their citizens from inappropriately loud noises, but when protesters argue that their freedom of speech is being curbed, those rules are disregarded. Excessive loud noise has been shown to cause hearing loss in young children. And when those deaf children become drivers, they will be unable to hear fire truck and ambulance and police sirens, causing massive problems in emergency situations. Thus, for the protection of people who may someday set their houses on fire, fall off of bridges or have heart attacks while golfing, we should not allow freedom of speech.

Issue: USian Stance: Pro

The term 'American' should not be used to describe people from the United States of America. USian is a far superior term. Because, it shows clearly, that we are better. We all know that we are engaged in a global fight against terrorism. But what you may not know, is the UN, as well as all of Europe, Asia, Australia, South America, Canada, Mexico, and space aliens (just the grey's, but still) have all been infiltrated by Al Qaeda. And if you are not with US, then you are with THEM. And you all know who they are. So proudly show your good guy heritage. It's a war out there- US versus THEM. So be an USian.

Fair enough... I will take the con on this one...

The term USian is very hard to pronounce. YOUzian? YOU-ESSian? USHan? US(as opposed to THEM)ian? Or even worse, how about the variation USAian? It is just impossible.

Many people from other countries sneak into the United States every year as illegal immigrants, mostly because "American" is easier to pronounce than whatever it is they call themselves wherever they come from. Those illegal immigrants are important to our society and our infrastructure as they provide all the vital lawn watering and french frying skills that we so greatly lack. If our children were forced to leave school to compensate for the fact that immigrants refused to come here because they could not pronounce USian, then our children would not learn how to pronounce it either, and the entire world would be unable to yell "Help us, USians, come invade our country, kill our civilians, steal our oil and drive out the terrorists who you helped create in the first place!" because no one would be able to pronounce our name.

Thus it is important, even vital, that the term USian be stricken from all use.

Fair enough... I will take the con on this one...

The term USian is very hard to pronounce. YOUzian? YOU-ESSian? USHan? US(as opposed to THEM)ian? Or even worse, how about the variation USAian? It is just impossible.

Many people from other countries sneak into the United States every year as illegal immigrants, mostly because "American" is easier to pronounce than whatever it is they call themselves wherever they come from. Those illegal immigrants are important to our society and our infrastructure as they provide all the vital lawn watering and french frying skills that we so greatly lack. If our children were forced to leave school to compensate for the fact that immigrants refused to come here because they could not pronounce USian, then our children would not learn how to pronounce it either, and the entire world would be unable to yell "Help us, USians, come invade our country, kill our civilians, steal our oil and drive out the terrorists who you helped create in the first place!" because no one would be able to pronounce our name.

Thus it is important, even vital, that the term USian be stricken from all use.

Gonna go Con on this one too.

People say that USian should be used because the USA is not the only America. I say that there's a much simpler solution. Simply go on a Mad Conquest Spree (tm) and bring the rest of the Americas under our control. No confusion and no need for USian.

People say that USian should be used because the USA is not the only America. I say that there's a much simpler solution. Simply go on a Mad Conquest Spree (tm) and bring the rest of the Americas under our control. No confusion and no need for USian.

Your plan lacks ambition. I hereby suggest that the USA renames itself to the United States of the Universe to reflect the inevitable future state of affairs.

Topic: Feminism Position: Con

It is absolutely necessary to have specific gender roles that everyone must meet. It has to be very clear from your behavior whether you are male or female. If it isn't, then clones won't act properly. Once we start cloning people, we need them to act just like the person from whom they are cloned. Otherwise, what is the point in having a clone? This will be much easier to achieve with set gender roles. This way, a man's wife will cook and clean for him and have babies. When she dies and he clones her, the new wife will do the same - because that will be what women do.

Fair enough... I will take the con on this one...

The term USian is very hard to pronounce. YOUzian? YOU-ESSian? USHan? US(as opposed to THEM)ian? Or even worse, how about the variation USAian? It is just impossible.

Many people from other countries sneak into the United States every year as illegal immigrants, mostly because "American" is easier to pronounce than whatever it is they call themselves wherever they come from. Those illegal immigrants are important to our society and our infrastructure as they provide all the vital lawn watering and french frying skills that we so greatly lack. If our children were forced to leave school to compensate for the fact that immigrants refused to come here because they could not pronounce USian, then our children would not learn how to pronounce it either, and the entire world would be unable to yell "Help us, USians, come invade our country, kill our civilians, steal our oil and drive out the terrorists who you helped create in the first place!" because no one would be able to pronounce our name.

Thus it is important, even vital, that the term USian be stricken from all use.

I disagree with you on the issue...but that was funny as hell.

Teh stupid flag burning argument / Con
People shouldn't be able to burn flags, because then everyone would be wasting matches and so MASS DEFORESTATION!!!!1!
Or
Teh stupid flag burning argument / Con
People shouldn't be able to burn the US flag because in some nations it's illegal to burn other countries flags and so if Germans can't burn the US flag, then why should we be able to?
Or
Thought Crime/Pro
Thought crime should be illegal cause otherwise big brothers around the world get a bad name.

Isreal's existance: con

The zionist invaders need to be driven into the sea and have no right to a homeland to call their own. The only reason most people validate the existance of Isreal is because they feel bad for the jews after the holocaust, and therefore Isreal should not exist. It is not shameful for the other countries of the middleast to exploit the Palestinian sufferings for their own hatred and desire to end Isreal.

Isreal's existance: con

The zionist invaders need to be driven into the sea and have no right to a homeland to call their own. The only reason most people validate the existance of Isreal is because they feel bad for the jews after the holocaust, and therefore Isreal should not exist. It is not shameful for the other countries of the middleast to exploit the Palestinian sufferings for their own hatred and desire to end Isreal.
...I actually support this argument...
And one of the rules of the game is you can't use an argument you've seen before.

That last one is too close to the original argument.
See the first post for a good example.
Or any of the rabbit ones.

Gay marriage should be banned because studies suggest that gay relationships are more stable than heterosexual relationships. Therefore, if we allow gays to marry, straight people will see that gay weddings have less divorce. This will lead to greater unhappiness in hetero marriages, which will lead to higher divorce rates. Ultimitly this cycle will continue until the divorce rate is 100%, and people are divorces within minutes of being married.

Therefore, seeking a method for sexual release (since we all know you can't have sex outside of marriage) men will turn gay, in order to have successful marriages, and get a little sex in on the side. Therefore, since all our men will be gay, and we don't let gays in the military, we will not have a standing army anymore, and the terrorists will win.

So remember folks, if you support gay marriage, you support terrorism.

Okay, here's how the game is played:

Pick a topic that has been debated ad nauseum, like gay marriage or communism vs. capitalism.

You will be arguing the side that you normally oppose.

HOWEVER. You must come up with an argument that you have NEVER seen used before.

Points will be awarded based on the following elements:

1) Creativity (how original is your argument?)
2) Style/presentation (how well did you express your argument?)
3) Technical merit (how well does your argument hold up? It's okay if your premises are silly, as long as the structure of the argument is solid.)

Premarital sex should be banned...

...because nobody should have to listen to their roommate's after sex conversation. Here's an exerpt:

"Oh Johnny you made me cum and cum and cum! Like five times!"
"Yes Betty. That was so cumfy."
"Cumfy coochie coo! Now I feel thoroughly humped!"
"Yes sweety betty boo."

ARGGGGGGGGGGGHHHHHHHHH!

Prolonged exposure to teenage after sex talk may result in blindness or deafness due to involuntary insertion of fingers.

Sex should only be allowed within marriage because marital sex is beautifully silent. Followed by sleeping back to back.

Example:

(Topic=gay adoption. Position=con)

"Gays should be prohibited from rearing children because homosexuals are more likely to rear their children in homes that are tastefully decorated in soothing earth tones. Research has established that color of one's environment will have a significant impact on one's temperment and mood. If we are to breed a new generation of super-soldiers who will protect us against the Muslims and feminists, we will need children to be reared in jarring environments full of harsh bright colors. This will help them to grow up appropriately rage-filled and anxious. We can then channel this distress into military fervor."
I pwn joo!!!

No, you homo-hating neocon! Children should ALL be raised by gays because studies show that children raised by homosexuals are more likely to be fat, which means we wont be able to fight all these wars because everyone will be in line at IHOP. Therefore, we should also go ahead and require anyone who runs for political office to be raised by homosexuals, because it has also been shown that fat politicians are too busy screwing their secretaries to f*** the rest of the world.

I disagree with you on the issue...but that was funny as hell.


Oh, rest assured, I disagree with me on the issue too! Isn't that the point of this thread? But thanks for the compliment. :fluffle:

OK... I've got one...

Israel-con

A large problem in society today is a lack of self esteem. One thing that causes this lack in men is baldness. It has been shown that the constant wearing of a hat can contribute to a weakening of the hair follicles beneath the hat, which in turn leads to an earlier and more pronounced onset of baldness. In Israel, a great majority of the population is Jewish, and one point of the Jewish faith is that men must wear head coverings. That little beanie that they wear (and stepping out of the Devil's Advocate character for a second, yes, I do know how to spell yarmulke...) sits right on the spot where most baldness starts... so therefor Israel should be disbanded for the good of the world.

Oh, rest assured, I disagree with me on the issue too! Isn't that the point of this thread? But thanks for the compliment. :fluffle:

Well, yes that is the point of the thread- what I was saying is that I disagree with your REAL stance on the issue. But your straw man/pseudo argument from my side of the issue was funny as hell, is my point.

Well, yes that is the point of the thread- what I was saying is that I disagree with your REAL stance on the issue. But your straw man/pseudo argument from my side of the issue was funny as hell, is my point.


Ohhh... ok. I think. I was a little confused, but now... I am a lot confused. Fortunately it is not contagious.

But still thanks for the compliment! :p

Your plan lacks ambition. I hereby suggest that the USA renames itself to the United States of the Universe to reflect the inevitable future state of affairs.


Which would mean that EVERYONE in the whole universe could be USians. Think how much THAT would piss off the "American, not USian" crowd.

Points will be awarded based on the following elements:

1) Creativity (how original is your argument?)
2) Style/presentation (how well did you express your argument?)
3) Technical merit (how well does your argument hold up? It's okay if your premises are silly, as long as the structure of the argument is solid.)


So, after 5 pages, where are these points of which you spoke???

Sin is not just the act, but more importantly, it the willingness to do the act. What made the original sin so bad was not the fact that Adam and Eve bit the apple, but that they disobayed God when he said "do not eat that fruit."

thus what right, do we as sinners (in any and all faiths) have to forcibly prevent someone from sinning. Those then are not following God's laws because they want to, but because they are being forced by others to do so. God does not want the unwilling.

thus we should live a good life, show others how to live and teach them by living that life, not force them by making laws baised only on Religious beliefs.

...Thus, for the protection of people who may someday set their houses on fire, fall off of bridges or have heart attacks while golfing, we should not allow freedom of speech.
What I love is that if you skipped to the end of this post without reading the beginning, you would have absolutely no clue how this conclusion was reached.

That's worth a bonus 5 style points. :)

So, after 5 pages, where are these points of which you spoke???
Hey, I never said I had to be the one awarding them. :D

feminism con.

I'm against any rights to women. As all men know in their hearts women should be barefoot, pregnant and kept at home cooking and cleaning. If you give them rights or the ability to read and write even, they start getting in the way of intelligent conversation and it means we can't have fun talking about gunz, alcohol and how gross gay people are. I mean look how down hill this forum has gone because of women. BRING BACK MEN ONLY CLUBS/FORUMS!!!!

homeschooling con

Children shouldn't be with their parents so much, you gave birth to the kid now let go of them, it's like you think you are responsible for them or something, school won't hurt them, we have to protect them from learning anything from you anyway, besides, if you knew anything you would know that the government knows best about everything, they are the ones who should teach your kids, if you didn't learn that in school than I don't know what school you went to, but it wasn't a good one.