Lady Gaga's Music as a whole is Immoral

As a brief road-map I'll be going Con, then Pro Con- First I have NOT agreed to my opponent's clarifications, as I said before "...the intention of this debate is not to argue whether or not specific areas that my opponent is able to argue are immoral or not, but to argue Lady Gaga(Stefani Germanotta)'s music as whole." Again, I cannot stress enought that we are arguing Lady Gaga's music in full. This includes Music Videos (If it has comes to that), all Songs released under her name, and any other aspect of her music (including songs she has written for other people) The fact that I've only started with the couple of songs that I have, is because these are the songs in which I've happened to re the lyrics. Next my opponent agrees that we are arguing Lady Gaga's music as a whole and yet further claims that the only permissible songs, are the 39 songs on her first three albums, out of the more than [1] 150 songs she has written This limits the debate, and thus my opponent violates the resolution. My opponent also claims that out of these 39 songs, 25 have "little to nothing morally objectable to them" First my opponent never warrants that these songs have nothing wrong with them, second he says "little" meaning there are parts that are morally objectable. At the point any part of the song is morally objectable, the song is entirely immoral. Ultimately on my opponent's side of the debate, the break multiple rules, disregard my own arguments, and have no warrants behind what little arguments they make. Pro- Glorifies Sex and vanity- - First my opponent rebutes by offering up the song "Born this way" however I will easily refute this First, when Gaga speaks of God, she never specifies which God she speaks of. This "God" Could be anything from Zeus, to Appolos, to Ares, to Erebos. So we don't know that this is necessarily a good thing. I certainly don't think I would want to stay myself if I where made by a God of hatred and anger, or a God of Darkness. According to scripture, the God of the bible commands us to "[2]Turn from the wicked ways" in which we where born into by our sinful nature. Next this song says not to be insecure if your heart is pure, yet there is not weighing mechanism to gauge purity there; and this in such a sense everything is pure just because they want it to be. Ultimately this song is not moral, as through it's lyrics it rejects any kind of standard for morality, and is thus immoral. - It would appear I went through some of Lady Gaga's lyrics too quickly. After more closely reading over "Fashion of his love" I can see nothing objectable, so I drop that argument. - My opponent claims that Lady Gaga like many girls across the United States likes fashion; Which I will agree to many people do like fashion, as an artist myself I too enjoy fashion. However in making this claim my opponent completely downplays, and utterly ignores my argument; in that it was about vanity not fashion. Princeton.edu defines fashion as [3]"the latest and most admired style in clothes and cosmetics and behavior" where as Vanity is defined as [4] "feelings of excessive pride" Obviously these are very different things. And again, here is some scripture on the matter; Proverbs 31:30 "Charm is deceitful, and beauty is vain, but a woman who fears the Lord is to be praised." Not only does a large majority of Lady Gaga's music promote outer beauty, but it's obvious she doesn't fear God (especially how she puts herself into a God-like position as being called Mother-Monster) Also on that note, although Gaga claims to be a catholic Christian, she advocates and teaches many things not canon in the bible. Hebrews 13:9 "Do not be led away by diverse and strange teachings, for it is good for the heart to be strengthened by grace, not by foods, which have not benefited those devoted to them." Next my opponent claims that some of Gaga's songs are bad, and that he doesn't listen to them. However by listening to even one, he supports all of these songs; thus this argument is a moot point. To explain further, my opponent mentions albums; and in buying an album he buys all of the songs on that album. and even where he to burn the CD onto his computer, deletes all of the bad songs, and throw the CD away; he has still paid for, and thus supported these bad songs. Next my opponent rebutes my argument by saying that it is pure conjecture. He inferences that I am in turn calling Lady Gaga, all of these bad things (demon-possessed prostitute) , when all I'm doing is displaying the possible outcomes of her music. Ultimately my opponent never argues back, or denies these arguments.He simply brushes them off, and then downplays Lady Gaga's influence. This is both a fallacious rebuttal, and completely abusive. Lady Gaga has been the number 1 selling artist for the last two years, she has the most followers of any-one else on Twitter ([5]enumeration over 10,000,000) she has more than 2,000,000 more followers than out own president. Thus anything she says, no matter how trivial or major is going to influence her fans. Finally my opponent says that the one bad sheep makes the whole flock bad ideology is irrelevant here. Ignoring the fact my opponent never tells us why this is true, they've not even shown us any reason why the majority of Lady Gaga's music is not immoral. In their own arguments, they provide a bit of framework, list out several song titles, and then come to the conclusion that they're all fine. In their arguments against my own case, they offer broken and untrue logic that never really proves anything My opponent also does not argue the solution when they say "Each song should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis." as we are debating Lady Gaga's music as a whole entity. In conclusion, there is utterly no reason to vote for the Con in today's debate; you must vote Pro. =sources= [1] http://bit.ly... [2] Acts 3:19 [3] http://bit.ly... [4] http://bit.ly... [5] http://bit.ly... [6] http://on.mtv.com...