The US should tell Russia that Edward Snowden is Gay so that Russia will arrest+deport him

Pro: Did you seriously use like 12 sources in one round for a troll debate? Con: Did you seriously just cry foul in a troll debate? Doesn't that sort of miss the point? Pro: While its true that Snowden doesnt completely match with what a gay guy looks like, con forgets that Snowden doesnt know that hes gay, and that not knowing your gay yet is VERY different then being gay and knowing it. .. . What do people who dont know their in the closet look and dress like? Con: The same. That's why everybody else know's they're gay before they do. Just because Taylor Lautner doesn't know he's gay yet doesn't mean he's wearing beige until he figures it out. Pro: I went to Neil Patrick Harris's house at 3 in the morning and buttf*cked another guy right there on his front lawn, and he was NOT HAPPY ABOUT IT AT ALL. Con: That's odd. When I buttf*cked a guy on NPH's lawn, he jumped right in for some Chinese handcuffs action. .. .maybe it's just you? Pro: I think everyone agrees that Mojitos are the gayest drink there is. .. .. . Next to Cherry Coke Con: As Neil and I were toweling off beside the pool, I asked him for a top ten list of homobeverages. Here's his list: 1)Boysenberry Cosmopolitan 2)Fuzzy Navel 3) Fresca 4)Blueberry Vodka 5)Jello shot sampler arranged in a rainbow 6)Non-fat, half-caff, triple grande, quarter-sweet, sugar-free, vanilla, extra hot, extra foamy caramel macchiato 7) Sperm 8) Turquoise Margarita 9) Fiji Bottled Water 10) Strawberry Smoothie As you can see, mojito did not even make Neil's top ten. Pro: If the US told Russia that Snowden was gay, that to them seems normal since Vladimir over there just drove his tank to work, and he works as a f***ing mailman! Con: Um, okay. .. what? Pro: He orchestrated the single biggest leak of government intelligence in history Con: No, no he didn't. You can complain about my citing sources, but the evidence was used to establish that Snowden did nothing extraordinary. If you are going to state that Snowden's leak was bigger than, say, giving the atomic bomb to Russia like Fuchs and the Rosenbergs did, I think you're going to have to back it up with at least one fact. Pro: You know very well that people dont read newspapers anymore. A lot of what Snowden blew the horn on was stuff that people really didnt know even though there were previous stories and evidence that revealed the same thing. Con: So, if you told your girlfriend that you planned to cheat on her, and she said she didn't care, does she still have grounds for complaint when she catches you in another woman's bed a few months later? No When the govt tells us something is true, it doesn't make the news because govt is boring. But when the news pretends to have uncovered the truth, that's exciting. Nevertheless, the record shows that Snowden revealed nothing extraordinary. Pro: Besides, the debate isnt whether or not the US should be going after Snowden Con: Well, you're the one who wants him back. My argument is that any action the govt takes against Snowden only makes him look more credible. In conclusion, nobody's ever going to believe a beige dweeb like Snowden is secretly gay. Certainly not the Russians, who are wise in the ways of gaydar, because they are super -duper gay themselves. The trick here is to not fall for the hype. In spite of all the hue and cry, nobody has established that Snowden revealed any significant government secrets. What did he say that we didn't already know? The answer is nothing new, and nothing should be our response to Snowden's snow job. Any action we take against Snowden empowers his and his admirers' delusions of grandeur.