Let's play The Devil's Advocate!

Okay, in this game you must debate your opponent, but you have to argue against your own beliefs and causes.

Rules:

* Choose any given topic. Ex.Abortion, Curfew Hours, Gun Control, Anything at all!

* It must be something you are personally against but you must debate on its behalf.

* You may not insult your opponent.

* Only two people per debate.

* Only eight posts total(four per person) before the winner takes the trophy.

*The challenger gets to pick the topic.

I hope this game helps you understand a bit of your opponents view.

Have fun.

Note: There is no actual trophy...sorry.

(Forgive me Amp, for delaying my response and completely forgetting about our debate after I left for some time.)

quote:

what's the difference?

The difference here, Amp, is that we are discussing immigration, not the resources spent outside of the U.S. Let's stay on topic, please.

quote:

I don't see why not, as long as they take the oath and register so they can pay taxes and what not I don't see why we shouldn't let everyone in

What do you mean exactly when you say "everyone"? Are you suggesting that we let even criminals in? And what about overpopulation?

quote:

The terrorists are going to get in if they want to wether we like it or not and they are not coming in through legal immigration portal.

Okay, I'll give you the first part of that statement. But do you mean with "they are not coming in through legal immigration portal."? Hadn't 11 of the 15 terrorists from 9/11 come in with student visas?

quote:

If we make it easier for people to come her legally the illegal immigrations across the border, including terrorists will be easier to spot

I disagree. And I think that these people who are coming across the border should attempt to fix their own countries and economy instead of leaving their people and their land to waste in poverty.

Hmm...As far as I know, this thread is to learn about different issues, have a bit of fun and become more open-minded, not to inflate our egos...


That being said, I would be happy to debate someone on some matter...let me know.

The thing is YV, the real debater on this website is actually out debating... not so much debating on this thread.

Anyawy, I am willing to take any side on any issue, this is because I am a real debater who does switch side debate. Thus really have no opinons. Because I can defend all opions

quote:

That has nothing to do with this discussion. We're talking about taking people in, not going out in to someone else's country

what's the difference? we're still expanding resources to save the world. In fact by going out and making house calls we're expanding far more resources then we are taking people in

quote:

Might as well open the whole border and let everyone from any country in.

I don't see why not, as long as they take the oath and register so they can pay taxes and what not I don't see why we shouldn't let everyone in

quote:

That may be so, but times are not the same as they were then. After 9/11 and the terrorist threats we can't let just everyone in that easily.

The terrorists are going to get in if they want to wether we like it or not and they are not coming in through legal immigration portal. If we make it easier for people to come her legally the illegal immigrations across the border, including terrorists will be easier to spot

quote:

They only did something illegal because of our impossible immigration laws that make waits of 7 years normal to get here!

So you're saying that that excuses it and therefore it's okay for the law to be broken? What purpose those a law serve then if it will not be enforced? Might as well open the whole border and let everyone from any country in.

quote:

We used too, that's how my families got here, they were abused, broken, half dead in heart and soul and despite them being despised this great nation took us in.

That may be so, but times are not the same as they were then. After 9/11 and the terrorist threats we can't let just everyone in that easily.

quote:

Explain Iraqi freedom and the GWOT to me then, certaintly seems we're trying to save the world

That has nothing to do with this discussion. We're talking about taking people in, not going out in to someone else's country. Plus, who said I supported the war in Iraq?

quote:

But that's my point, they belong in the US now they have children and husbands and wives who are US citizens, their familys and lives are here.

They should have thought about that before coming across our borders. It's a messy situation now. Yeah, we'll look like the bad guys now for tearing families apart when we're only trying to enforce the law and look after our own interests.

quote:

Well, there you go. They did something illegal and so they should be punished accordingly. They shouldn't have come in to this country in the first place.

They only did something illegal because of our impossible immigration laws that make waits of 7 years normal to get here!

quote:

But we can't just go around taking everyone in to this country. Could you imagine how overpopulated we would be if we really did take all the "poor, tired and huddled masses"?

We used too, that's how my families got here, they were abused, broken, half dead in heart and soul and despite them being despised this great nation took us in.

quote:

We can't go around saving the world and everyone. There's just not enough resources for that.

Explain Iraqi freedom and the GWOT to me then, certaintly seems we're trying to save the world

quote:

We have to put a stop to it now, and send those people back to where they belong.

But that's my point, they belong in the US now they have children and husbands and wives who are US citizens, their familys and lives are here.

quote:

people who's only crime was jumping the line at the immigration office.

Well, there you go. They did something illegal and so they should be punished accordingly. They shouldn't have come in to this country in the first place.

quote:

The statue of liberty is still saying "Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses." we need to listen to her

But we can't just go around taking everyone in to this country. Could you imagine how overpopulated we would be if we really did take all the "poor, tired and huddled masses"? We can't go around saving the world and everyone. There's just not enough resources for that.

I understand what you're saying about them being good people. I'm not saying that they're not. But they did something illegal. If we legalize the people already here, then more people will feel the need to come across our borders thinking that they'll get legalized easily too. We have to put a stop to it now, and send those people back to where they belong.

It is impossible to take the mass illegal population (11 million+ if you want to belive the president's numbers) and remove them from the country. They've been here for decades and have laid down firm fondations in ties of sweat and blood. Many families have come together to have even stronger ties and a peaceful existance in the worst neighborhoods in the country. Sending them back would destroy decades of work from good people who's only crime was jumping the line at the immigration office. As great as this country is can we really fault them for that? The statue of liberty is still saying "Give me your poor, your tired, your huddled masses." we need to listen to her

quote:

immigration?

specifically legalization of illegals already in country

Legalization of the people already living here? Hmm, Well, I'm for it if they're law abiding citizens who have been here for many years. Sure, let's do that. You argue for it and I'll go against it. Start.

hmmm

immigration?

specifically legalization of illegals already in country

I'm against it, are you for it? I don't recall...

Well, why don't you and I debate. Pick something other than gun control. Something you're against and I'm for, or vice versa. Any thoughts?

yup

damn I wish maya would get the fire in her belly about gun control again. Never mind that I always win but it's fun to argue

I suppose there's not many real debaters in the site, no matter how hard we try to bring them out.

same thing happened to mine so don't feel bad

Hm, so much for this thread...

quote:

The drinking age should not be lowered. Many people, especially those underage, are very irresponsibly when it comes to drinking.

Let's be honest, the fact that the legal age for drinking is 21 has not stopped teenagers from doing it. There's always someone who can and will buy liquor for them. There's really no sense on having a law that is not working. I mean roughly 80 percent of people in High School have tried it. What's the point of having a law that cannot be enforced successfully.

quote:

The number of accidents resulting from underage drinking every day is absurd.

Okay, I will give you that. But what if instead of cracking down on underage drinking, we concentrate on cracking down drinking AND driving, no matter what age you are.

quote:

Many 21 year olds are responsible adults, have at least part of a college education, and know when it's time to put the drinks away.

Not necessarily. Those are only assumptions.

The drinking age should not be lowered. Many people, especially those underage, are very irresponsibly when it comes to drinking. The number of accidents resulting from underage drinking every day is absurd. Many 21 year olds are responsible adults, have at least part of a college education, and know when it's time to put the drinks away. Those underage, however, are less responsible and care only about having fun. They have no self-awareness when it comes to drinking and thus are quicker to pick up the keys and go for a drive while under the influence. This often results in injury or death. Also, at such a young age, those who do not want to drink are more easily pressured into doing so by friends who are drinking. I'm not saying that everybody over 21 is completely responsible, either, but they are at least more responsible, and that's why the drinking age should not be lowered.

Alright, I challenge you to a debate, Cap or who ever wants to play.

Topic: Underage Drinking

I Am: Against Underage Drinking

Opponent: For Underage Drinking

(In other words I need someone who is for underage drinking but argues against it)

************************************************

First Post:

There is nothing wrong with drinking if you can actually hold your liquor down. I think that the drinking age should be lowered. It's absurd for me to think that the law finds it just for an 18 year old to be sent and die in war but not be able to drink until he/she is 21 years old. Plus, this is my body and no one should be able to tell me what I can and cannot do. It's not like I'm harming others, I'm not forcing others to drink.

quote:

Uh...okay, I'll play! Who am I debating against?

The first person who posts and says they'll debate you.

quote:

And what am I debating about?

You get to choose. But you have to argue against what you believe.

Ex.

Topic: Abortion

You: Pro-choice

Opponent: Pro-life

But now you have to argue on behalf of pro-life.

Anyhow, choose a topic and pick your side, and then wait for someone to challenge(this will go much slower than I thought it would).