John Adams should replace Jefferson on the nickel.

My opponent has made some wild and unsupported claims throughout his arguments. I think it's important that this be cleared up. He also has made some very hypocritical arguments which I wish to expose. "he rants and displays poor conduct towards me" What? You provide no evidence what so ever and make a personal attack upon me. Nowhere in my arguments have I made a personal attack against you. I have only attacked your arguments and your claims. If you claim I display poor conduct then you need to support it. I think making a personal attack upon me like that it is above all else poor conduct. Only once in your arguments do you claim I showed poor conduct, using faulty evidence might I add. ""To say Jefferson wrote the Declaration of Independence is a grave ignorance of historical fact." I never said Jefferson wrote the entire Declaration of Independence. I stated that he was its chief author. My opponent calls me ignorant? Poor conduct. My opponent is ignorant in trying to prove a moral obligation with an opinion of Adams not being honored properly. He has failed to accomplish his Burden as of yet." No where did I say claimed directly that you had said that Jefferson wrote the declaration in it's entirety. I called your CONTENTION of calling Jefferson the chief author ignorant. You didn't respond to my points about the significant lines in the declaration a being HEAVILY influenced and in some cases not even written by Jefferson. For instance the line: We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. Was not the original line. That can be found here: http://quotationsbook.com... "My opponent has failed to provide evidence that Adams is, in fact, not honored properly." He isn't! Adams has almost little to no recognition on a national scale in portion to his achievements. Jefferson is honored too much based on what he accomplished, which is why I think it is appropriate to replace Jefferson with Adams. If you think he is properly honored based on his achievements then I challenge you find an example of where he is honored appropriately. In fact you even said he was not honored properly in round 1: "I understand that John Adams is one of our great Founding Fathers. He may not be honored properly, " How does my opponent explain the own contradictions in his contentions? "That is simply my opponent's opinion, and he has not provided any factual evidence as to why that is true." Of course it's an opinion! Debates are based around opinions! What makes one opinion more validated then another one is evidence to support it. That's why my contentions were what Adam's achieved. "Placing a man's face on a nickel is not necessarily honoring that man. " Definition of honor: award: a tangible symbol signifying approval or distinction [1] Placing Adams on the most widely used currency in the world is a symbol of distinction. "My opponent then states that Jefferson hated debt and once he was in power, he had no problem defying his own principles. Jefferson states that he does not want to be in perpetual debt, which would essentially mean debt that would not be able to be paid off. He realized that some debt was needed to keep Americans working and achieve successes abroad. My opponent's argument for this was quite weak." We had a ton of debt when we made the Louisiana purchase! In fact we had just payed a large sum of money to declare war on Spain. [2] Regardless, Jefferson still had to use the National Bank created by Hamilton to make the purchase. Something he heavily argued against. Not to mention the fact he also made the purchase without first consulting congress about how to acquire new land and therefore expanding the power of the federal government; something he HATED! Jefferson had a track record of saying one thing and doing another. In addition to the above he also owned slaves despite the fact he thought it was one of the sins of man. "Well done is better then well said. A good example is the best sermon." Adam's spoke out against slavery and did not own any. "My opponent tries to impress the audience with the list of achievements I ignored about Adams. " So did you. Just that you provided less achievements and therefore less of a reason for other founding fathers to be honored. See here: "John Jay (not Joy): He was the first Chief Justice and symbolized the beginning of a true judiciary branch. His leadership helped establish the checks and balance system in America, which is quite significant." How have you differed from your own contention against me? "Once again, my opponent only uses opinion, tries to provide facts of Adams's achievements, but has failed to use proper logic." That statement is in of itself a contradiction. I think my opponent "has failed to use proper logic." ""Once again his achievements are no where near Adams." Again, this is opinionated. There are different views of what achievements are important to specific parts of the government or the economy. Thomas Jefferson doubled the size of the United States with the Louisiana Purchase. Consequently, Americans were able to use more resources and became a much stronger nation. Once again, my opponent only uses opinion, tries to provide facts of Adams's achievements, but has failed to use proper logic." If you would like an example of what poor conduct is, then you have found it. My quote was referring to Patric Henry which is why I put it in my contention WITH HIM, not Jefferson. You are misconstruing what I've said without context. I ask my opponent: why does he do so? My opponent also seems dazed and confused based on his arguments about burden of proof. Since he has elected to prove that another another founding father is more worthy then Adams to replace Jefferson on the nickel, then the BoP shifts to him. He even acknowledge this in his CLARIFICATIONS! "I have the ability to convince the readers that another person besides Adams should replace Jefferson." Exactly YOU would now have to convince the readers, not me! BoP is on you! "I have already provided a definition of the word "should" in my opening argument. I stated that "should" refers to a morally binding duty or obligation. As the first person in this debate to provide a definition for that word, my definition stands." Nope. As stated in round 1: "I do not believe definitions are necessary as this is a pretty straightforward topic, but then again this debate.org so I reserve the right clarify the topic should I deem necessary." I will be exercising these reserved powers. "Should" in the topic refers to the definition I stated in round 2: "should: used in auxiliary function to express obligation, propriety, or expediency" Consider it clarified. Conclusion "It does not matter about being honored!" Yes, yes it does. Do think it's right to undervalue someone's contributions to society? We have an obligation to honor someone properly such as Adam's. As I mentioned before you agreed in round one that Adams is not properly honored. The nickel is a appropriate place to honor him because as I've proved, in proportion to his achievements Jefferson is over honored while Adam's is under honored. My opponent now having the BoP must prove that one of our founding father deserves to be on the nickel more then Adams. This will be tough because he has not responded to any of my original contentions. Points dropped by my opponent: I will quote from last round. "0 A B C D E F G H I G K L So ALL OF THEM." My opponent has admitted that he ignored all my contentions . See here: ""My opponent tries to impress the audience with the list of achievements I ignored about Adams. " This also proves my opponent was ignorant. :) [1] http://tinyurl.com... [2]http://tinyurl.com...