Registration for 1 on 1 political debate threads

[bobman0330]

[ QUOTE ]
-The Framers' original intent is the best way to apply/interpret the Constitution: I would take the con side.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd debate in favor of original meaning. Original intent is pretty much dead these days.

[AzDesertRat]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
-The Framers' original intent is the best way to apply/interpret the Constitution: I would take the con side.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd debate in favor of original meaning. Original intent is pretty much dead these days.

[/ QUOTE ]


I'd debate the original meaning (in favor) also in a backup role.

[Case Closed]

[censored],

Great idea man. I would like to take part in this. Although I guess I would put myself as a small stakes debater in comparison to some of the folks on here. Although I would like to try my hand at this if someone is interested in going at it with me.

My topics:

Gay Marriage: Pro gay marriage
Iraq War: Immediate Pull out

I would like to see someone debate snowball in something related to communism.

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[censored],

Great idea man. I would like to take part in this. Although I guess I would put myself as a small stakes debater in comparison to some of the folks on here. Although I would like to try my hand at this if someone is interested in going at it with me.

My topics:

Gay Marriage: Pro gay marriage
Iraq War: Immediate Pull out

I would like to see someone debate snowball in something related to communism.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'll take the anti-Gay marriage (although I am against all government sanctioned marriages... maybe I shouldn't have turned my cards over yet).

[Poofler]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
-The Framers' original intent is the best way to apply/interpret the Constitution: I would take the con side.


[/ QUOTE ]

I'd debate in favor of original meaning. Original intent is pretty much dead these days.

[/ QUOTE ]

I'd consider doing this as a Devil's advocate, because I find it interesting; but it's probably best to have someone arguing who doesn't think he's wrong.

[Case Closed]

tomcollins,

I would be in favor of some type of end of state sanctioned marriages as well. I think it would be best if we kept the debate centered around state sanctioned marriages. It would not be interesting or relevant if we just agreed to this point. I would be interested in doing this if we could hammer out the details ahead of time.

[LinusKS]

I'll do --

That the US Civil War was fought over slavery. --Con.

That the atomic bomb ended WWII. --Con.

That the USSR did more to end WWII in Europe than the US. --Pro.


That liberals are more Christian than conservatives. --Pro.

Edit/Jman220: Disparaging comment against ACists deleted. No non-substance attacks against groups of people on this board merely for what they believe please.

[jman220]

[ QUOTE ]
That the US Civil War was fought over slavery. --Con.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you're going to find anyone to argue the pro side of this.

Edit: I guess I should say, I don't think there's really anyone who would argue that slavery was the primary reason for the civil war. Although, I guess I could be wrong.

[LinusKS]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That the US Civil War was fought over slavery. --Con.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you're going to find anyone to argue the pro side of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Really, that's surprising.

+++

Also, how about,

ACers don't make any sense.

That's ok, isn't it?

[TomCollins]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
That the US Civil War was fought over slavery. --Con.

[/ QUOTE ]

I don't think you're going to find anyone to argue the pro side of this.

[/ QUOTE ]

Speaking of, I want this one-

Hitler's Holocaust was the best thing in the 20th century- con