Resolved: Frodo was not justified in taking the Fellowship into Moria.

Before I dive into my next argument, I'd like to point out one thing - the Pro bears the burden of proof. This is commonly held debate theory. The Con does indeed bear the burden of proof for arguments that it brings up, but in the end, Pro bears the burden of proof to show the resolution true. Con only has to shed doubt on the Pro's case. Con doesn't have to prove anything. DA1.a. Pro said there were alternatives. Response - Crossapply Pro plan - if the Pro plan is defeated, then there are no alternatives in the round and Con wins. DA1.b: Pro said Con has the burden of proof. Response - irrelevant. This response has nothing to do with the original DA1 - that Gandalf died. I showed that the Pro DA1 was actually a Con argument - Gandalf's death was beneficial because he could become the White Wizard. Both sides agree that Gandalf became the White Wizard by going thru Moria. This uncontested. The Pro DA1 is a Con argument, Con still wins here. DA2.a Pro said Aragorn was not a good leader. Response - good enough. He didn't lose any time like Pro said in the DA2. DA2.b Pro said going through Moria had many more delays. Response 1 - only alternative. Crossapply Pro plan. If Pro plan is defeated then Moria is the only choice. Response 2 - quantify. How much time was actually lost, and did it materially affect the Fellowship? DA3: Pro said Gandalf knew the passages of Bilbo's path better. Response 1 - irrelevant. It's irrelevant which Gandalf knew better. The original DA of only one mistake still applies to both Moria and Bilbo's path. Response 2 - only choice. Once again, if the Pro plan won't work, then Moria is the only choice, regardless of DA's. Response 3 - not shown. Once again, Pro has not provided evidence to support his claim. DA3.a.1. Pro talked about Gandalf. Crossapply responses to Gandalf's death above under DA1.b and more. DA3.a.2. Pro then talked about Boromir. The books do not say that Boromir's repentance was temporary, but it can be inferred that it would have been had Boromir lived and Frodo stayed with the Fellowship. In addition, Pro conceded the fact that Men are more vulnerable to the draw of the Ring. So eventually, Boromir would have succumbed and taken the Ring, and we all know what would have happened after that. DA3.b.1. Pro conceded the main point - that Eru does exist. Argument won by Con. DA3.b.2. Pro then talked about how and when Eru intervenes. Response - irrelevant. We know that Eru got involved to keep the Ring from Sauron once (when Bilbo found it) and this is not contested. It's safe to assume that Eru would get involved again to keep the Ring from Sauron. In fact, Eru seems to not like Sauron - he drowned Numenor (like Pro pointed out) to prevent people under Sauron's influence from setting foot on Valinor. Con disadvantages: DA1: Pro said that Sauron only breeded orcs in Mordor. Pro then contradicted himself by saying that orcs could therefore not be anywhere but Mordor because of Gondor and Rohan, then he said that orcs were also present in Moria and Dol Guldur. I have several responses. Response 1 - contradiction, as I've already pointed out. Response 2 - where did the orcs come from? Moria was not occupied at the time of the Hobbit, because Balin later moved there, until the orcs multiplied and wiped out his colony. Where did they come from? Response 3 - Orc spawning. Obviously orcs regenerate by some unknown method, and the Misty Mountains would have also been crawling with them, just like Moria was. DA2 and DA3: Pro then painted a happy picture of a tramp through the caves of the Misty Mountains. The only problem being that that's not the way it would have happened. Pro did not respond to the double bind imposed by these two DA's - that either you get massacred or you have the Ring stolen by Boromir and Sauron gets the Ring. This double bind has not been responded to throughout the last two rounds, and therefore has been essentially conceded to by Pro. This argument is absolutely won by the Con. Impact - because the double disadvantages are won by Con, the entire Pro plan falls apart. Either you get massacred or Sauron gets the Ring. Both of those are obviously not good or legitimate reasons to do something. Because the sole Pro plan is the only alternative to the mines of Moria, and because it is defeated, regardless of who wins the Pro disadvantages, a Con vote is already warranted, as pointed out in the Pro DA1.a and 2.b.1. Finally, I'd like to reiterate that the Pro is the side that has the burden of proving the resolution. If there is any doubt whatsoever in your mind as to the Pro side of the resolution, then a Con vote is warranted. This is commonly held debate theory and I feel confident that @Dantheawesome will not contest this. At the end of the day, the Pro plan simply doesn't hold water, as shown by the Con DA's. Because the Pro plan doesn't work, a Con ballot is justified. Thank you, and I now hand the floor back to Pro.