Liberal v. Conservative (Uncensored)

This debate is, in every sense of the word, informal. Unlike most debates, conduct is no longer an issue Therefore, whomever accepts this debate agrees that it will get vicious! In simpler terms, this is meant to be more of a gritty argument than an organized debate. In that light, it will be much more entertaining for both the opponents and their audience. I hope that this is a first of many unrestricted debates. However, this does not mean that the validity of our arguments will not be judged. In a way, this is similar to the heated, but intellectual debates one has with one's family members who oppose one's beliefs. So yes, it is an actual debate, just without civility. It is meant to be more open. But one must still actually provide arguments as to why they do not hold the other's belief. The winner will be elected based on their arguments. As this is my first debate of this nature, I’ll lay down a few rules: 1. Conduct is not an issue. All manner of insults are fair game, so long as it remains nonviolent. Any threats or harassments made result in an instant forfeiture and potential report of your remarks. (In simpler terms: Don’t threaten someone, or be sexually perverse towards them. ) 2. Voting is not on a 7 point scale, however, the validity of your arguments still comes into question. A voter must still provide their reasoning as to why they elected a winner. 3. Acceptance of this debate equals automatic agreement to it’s heated and intense nature. 4. No matter how offensive the debate may get, both opponents agree to keep the uncivility within the debate only! Aggression and unsportsmanlike conduct should not occur outside of the debate. With the rules clarified, let’s get to the subject of this unique debate. Social Liberals v. Conservatives! In simpler terms, this debate will address issues like abortion, homosexuality, and women’s rights. (Other issues may apply, deepening on your own set of beliefs. ) Essentially both parties will provide a brief biography of their personal beliefs, subjecting them to all manners of insults within the debate. The winner will be elected based on their ability to shut down any arguments against them. The debate structure is as follows. Round 1: Acceptance and personal bio’s. Round 2: Pro attacks Con’s personal beliefs | Con refutes Pro’s attacks, attacks Pro. Round 3: Pro refute Con’s attacks, attacks Con | Con refutes Pro’s attacks, attacks Pro. Round 4: Pro refute Con’s attacks, attacks Con | Con refutes Pro’s attacks, attacks Pro. Round 5: Pro refutes Con’s attacks, gives closing statements. | Con gives closing statements. I hope my opponent finds this set-up effective. I would say my usual slogan, but there will be little civility here. .. so, let's just have fun. Personal Bio: I’ll be taking the Liberal position in this debate. I’m an extremely liberal Democrat who is pro-choice, pro-LGBT rights, and pro-Gun Control. I believe that freedom of religion is not exclusive to protestants, and that it does not give them the right to be conservative a**holes who do not want to allow my people to get married. I also believe that homosexuals and transgenders face unequivocal harassment and discrimination in MODERN society. I feel there is still a large gap between women and men, and that full equality has yet to occur. Finally, I believe that abortion should be left up to the woman and that conservatives need to look at the whole situation before they minimalize the issue by calling the woman irresponsible.