Freedom of expression should not be supressed by accusations of sexism.

Firstly, I would like to sincerely apologise for missing the last round. This is the first time I have done this but I spent most of the holiday weekend out at sea, far away from any wi-fi masts or Internet cafes. Secondly, I would like to thank my opponent for joining this debate and for taking the time to maul my opening arguments in such a comprehensive and ruthless manner! Before I develop my argument further, however, I should like to make it clear that my debates are sometimes humorous in nature and do not, necessarily, reflect my own personal opinion (though there's many a true word said in jest, of course). For instance, I argued that defunct websites should be removed from the Internet, using my own site as a prime example of a waste of server space: . http://www.debate.org... I also argued that it would be permissible to sell Indonesian people in pet shops, even though I actually believe this would not only be morally reprehensible but totally illegal: . http://www.debate.org... Similarly, I successfully demonstrated that God is a racist, even though I don't even believe in God: . http://www.debate.org... Therefore, I would ask that the judges should vote on the debate itself and not what they personally agree with. In my opponents rebuttal she wrote: "Making fun of Condoleez(z)'s race and role in government with blatant disregard for women? ! How clever! You're about as original as Carlos "Ned Holness" Mencia, mate. " Sorry, I'm not quite with her there, but if she is implying I was making fun of the Secretary of State's race or gender, I have obviously given her the wrong impression. You see, I write with a British accent - Ms. Rice's spoof dialogue was merely my attempt at writing with an American accent - the inclusion of this imagined conversation, incidentally, was to put my argument into context. By the way, I had never heard of Carlos Mencia before so I Googled him. It seems he is not, generally, well regarded due to his reputation for plagiarism. However, being based in London, I have never seen Condi Rice imitated or otherwise satirised, so I can assure readers that he passage in R1 is wholly original, even if my opponent didn't find it very funny. My opponent also wrote: "I would like to state for the record that your insecurity with your manhood and/or sexuality in patronizing women should not be a deciding factor in this debate. " Aha! She's got me banged to rights there! I am, indeed, a screaming homosexual. I take it that the "L" in the "theLwerd" stands for "lesbian" and that my opponent is also gay so we share something in common. With this in mind, I think we would get on well and I would like to take this opportunity to invite her, and her girlfriend, to stay at my house in the beautiful High Tatra Mountains of Slovakia. I would like to do that, but my wife (that means nothing by the way, lots of gay men are married) is very suspicious of other women since she discovered that I have been seeing a girl in Istanbul on a regular basis since 1993 (again, that doesn't mean anything, it is just a case of being in denial about my sexuality). You know, I explained to my wife that, since I met my girlfriend more than six years before I met her, if I was having an affair with anyone, it wasn't with my girlfriend, it was with her. Unfortunately, though, she failed to see the logic of my argument and my female acquaintances are no longer welcomed in the house. Never mind, though, I have a yacht moored in a marina in central London (from where I am writing now) and I would be delighted to see my opponent and her lesbian lover come aboard my boat one day. The vessel has a luxury interior, a well-appointed aft deck and cruises at 35 knots. On the downside, however, she only has one double berth, which means the three of us will have to share a bed. But that's okay – I'm gay – the girls can trust me. (Hmm…thinking about it though, I can't absolutely guarantee that I won't suddenly turn straight during the night – I have a presentiment that that sharing a bed with a couple of lesbians might just cure me! ) Anyway, to the argument proper…my opponent continued: "Second, there is a difference between saying things that can be CONSIDERED sexist, and saying things that are downright offensive. Men CAN express their admiration for attractive women without being sexist, therefore one should find more intelligent and socially acceptable ways to vocalize their views (especially during a debate on debate. org, where one would almost certainly get called out for being "abusive" if they did not comply with traditional debate etiquette). "