A debate is won by using facts, analysis, and refutations, not by insulting ideas

"Bottom line: a TRUE debate is WON by FACTS, not feelings" This supports the pro side of the debate. At least you didn't construct a case to argue the con side, because that would've defeated your own arguments. Instead of making generalizations, I will simplify the debate. I will use myself as a "typical liberal". I will use yourself as a "typical conservative". Of the debates that I have participated in, excerpts include: UNICEF (a charity organization of the UN dedicated to improving the lives of children worldwide, if you are unfamiliar with it), promotes safe sex education as the best means to educating young citizens worldwide. It is the best solution to preventing teenage pregnancy without promoting it. or analysis, such as: "It helps, such as in the instance of the London bus and subway bombings of 2006, it makes it much easier to not only identify the perpetrators but also to find where the bombs or weapons were made or kept. This will provide not only a preemptive measure to preventing terrorist attacks but also help the US piece together evidence if any problems were to occur." Your debates, however, feature points like: Hers is where the EVIL OF YOUR ARGUMENTS LIES WRONG WRONG WRONG IT IS EVIL > PERIOD. WRONG! WRONG ! WRONG ! NEVER NEVER NEVER ! the Guttmacher institute promotes abortion. period. they are in the business of promoting evil among the youth through early promiscuity, period. WRONG WRONG WRONG I say you lost the debate because you're wrong YOU CANT , becuase YOU DONT HAVE A CLUE WHAT YOURE TALKING ABOUT BS Your silly argument that YOU have posted COGENT arguments is laughable you are completely wrong here You are a stalinist and afraid of the truth grow up You are infested with marxist thought, my young friend. You need to get a clue or you will end up down the road of misery Now, although I am sure you are extremely tempted to resort to the normal bashing of a liberal society, that does not qualify in the restrictions of this debate. Yes, I myself enjoy having fun in debates by using rhetoric that is unfounded, however, I never base the validity of arguments on merely rhetoric. The main point is that I, the typical liberal, use facts. And yourself, the typical conservative, gets angry and is incapable of debating. Your style of debating, if used by all members of debate.org, would accomplish nothing. It would feature a few rounds of members calling each other evil, corrupted, and wrong, until the all of the rounds are completed. Then members would vote on the "debate" based on which side they agree with personally, because nothing has been accomplished by the debate. That isn't debate, that's a poll. Your style, no doubt, would fit in perfectly with opinionpolls.com. In order for your opinion to matter more over your opponents' opinion, you must be a professional or an expert in the subject. That is why debates cite professors, books, articles, and so on. The validity of each person's opinions vary, depending on how much expertise they hold. It is different for Solarman1969 to tell me that my arguments about economics are wrong than for Joseph E Stiglitz to do the same. -The Colonel