Lady Gaga's Music as a whole is Immoral

Majority MattersAs I explained above, the idea of majority matters is in no way abusive. It is the basis of my case, and provides sufficient ground for both PRO and CON to argue, needing only 6 songs to swing my case to the instigator's side. I did not offer a new definition than the one that I though we were arguing: "music as whole". Music is made up of building blocks, and when we look at what those building blocks of an artist's career are, it is easy to say they are songs. We must evaluate all the blocks, as I have, to determine if the entire structure is wholesome or in danger of collapse, to use a metaphor. What is abusive is, as I mentioned before, the notion that PRO needs to prove only that a few songs are bad for the entire discography to be bad. As for the telephone music video, if you'll really bring up such a new argument: Lady GaGa and Beyoncé attempt to poison her abusive boyfriend. They end up killing everybody. Whoops. This still doesn't show that the good is outweighed by the bad. The song is simply about being called while having a party, which I'm sure is obnoxious. Hair is about a need for individuality. She loves her hair, a lot of people do. Assume I grant that it is immoral: that leaves my case with 24 out of 37 songs being moral. See how easy this is? My case allows, as I said, sufficient ground for PRO to contest; in no way is it abusive. All my opponent had to do was make five other arguments like the one he just made with Hair, to win. There has been absolutely no indication that a majority of Lady GaGa's songs are immoral. He has chosen a few, and said they count for all songs she has created. I have specified which songs are good, and which are bad in my Round 2 case. Those bolded are neutral or good. Those not bolded are immoral. One Sheep Infects the Entire FlockAside from the fact that the majority of people download things (the Born this Way album received vastly more downloads than disc buys, see wikipedia's Born This Way Album). Remember what happens when I ask you "On the whole, was your spring break enjoyable". You won't let inconveniences ruin the entire thing, and on the whole, you'll say yes if the good outweighs the bad. Lady Gaga's music glorifies Sex and VanityAssume I concede ALL of this. The songs he names throughout the rounds are LoveGame, Alejandro, Teeth, Fashion of His Love (later conceded in Round 3) and, in this round, Telephone and Hair. That leaves us with 5 songs he's contested. If I concede all the songs that he has said are bad that are bolded in my cases, that de-bolds Alejandro, Telephone, and Hair. Thate leaves 22 songs / 39 songs. Still a majority. SummaryI have not legitimized all of Lady GaGa's music against the scripture, because some of it is bad. I'm going to go ahead and just appeal to the audience here. I've discussed my opponent's claims above, and the folowing few paragraphs are my summary. If you will read nothing but this part of my argument, so be it. But this is very important. The notion that I have "violated the resolutions" intentions is false. I went with what on the whole really means. My opponent, on the other hand, attempted to prove just a few songs were bad and win the debate from there. His definitions weren't in the first round and were note clarified to me beforehand; in no way can I be held responsible if things did not go as he intended. Such is the nature of a debate. When I ask you the question, "On the whole, was your spring break enjoyable? ", you will undoubtably consider it as follows: although one entity, your spring break was divided into several days and events. On evaluating each of these separate events as good or bad, you reach an answer: "Yes. " Given your answer, we can conclude that the majority of the events on your spring break were enjoyable, thus, the entire thing can be considered fun. There may be a few very bad parts - like when the TSA almost made you late for your flight, or when Customs took away your decorative shot glasses on the way back, or someone happened to get arrested by the police - but overall, you decide the good outweighs the bad, and you answer the question I posed affirmatively. Apply that same reasoning to this debate! When asked the question, "Is Lady GaGa's music, on the whole, immoral? " go through the evidence that I gave in the second round: an analysis of moral versus immoral songs in her discography that came up with the result the majority of her music was fine. Although there are bad parts, as I have freely admitted, they do not outweigh the good or neutral, even if I concede all of my opponent's attacks on the select songs he chose to contest. Given my opponent's admitted lack of familiarity with GaGa's music, he did not refute in any way my case. My case was the fairest way to go: it gave us both the possibility to win. If PRO had examine the evidence -- GaGa's songs -- he could easily pose that at least 6 (the required to make the majority bad - he opposed 3 on accident, even when not acknowledging my criterion) out of the 25 I gave were objectionable. Maybe even more. Instead he chose to go on a semantic interpretation of "as a whole", saying that he need only to prove that a few songs are bad to say the entire flock of Lady GaGa's music is immoral. Ask yourself, voter, which is the better? If you think my case would have made a better debate and agree with what I said above -- that we needed to look at all of her songs (even if I conceded that ones she wrote for other artists counts, he doesn't use them in his arguments at all), not just a few -- then you need to vote a CON ballot. What I just explained is "majority matters" - common sense.