Debate: Does the VIEWING of Child Pornography hurt anyone?
Side: No

I'm starting to wonder whether this "debate" is in vain. I'm up to 3 facepalms a paragraph. The only applicable meaning for disdain is with regards to your arguments, not you. I not once considered you personally disgraceful or vile. How can I attempt to appease a person I view to be irrational and completely illogical in their arguments? No, by using righteousness you meant your actions are justified in judgment of others (refer to previous post) which is why it's not possible to use it in that context. "Standing up for righteousness" 1) Screams that you're a christian and willing to use your god's "unquestioned rulebook" in debate, 2) Doesn't even make sense given that you are attempting to imply that this rulebook of yours holds any value amidst your refusal to argue logically,3) Since you're not white "(ahhh, white people)" odds are good righteousness was a term used to hurt your people in history (I don't even need to know which race you are, that's how insanely the church expanded throughout history) so it's laughable you're attempting to use it as a stand alone argument disregarding form or context. Righteousness contains the word right, that's true, but they have very different meanings. The word righteousness used in a christian context resembles more jargon than ideology. It was used to burn books, kill native populations, and rape "witches". Pick up a book (something other than the bible). Of course I was correct in my statement that you're standing up for a cause, your statement went "For some reason you seem to think i am an advocate for a cause" which implies that I'm incorrect in my thinking, you're the one that alluded to the fact that you weren't. I scrutinize what you're typing because I attempted the alternative. My work is nothing short of a thesis replete with examples, definitions, educational background work, logical thought and you disregarded it all. What possible motive do I have to continue with more arguments.Anyone willing to take her place in this debate is more than welcome, we will phase her out and continue with intelligent discussion, I welcome it after this escapade.The insight into my opinion is essays long, look up! When debating with you, our arguments put me on a pedestal. I didn't do a thing to dwarf your arguments with my own. I don't view myself as special in any way. Were I debating with someone of similar capacity (millions of people) this wouldn't even appear to be a pedestal situation. I did insult you, but not to try to put you down, more responded to your fire with fire. I can't tell you anything you won't listen to, I was definitely received well by others witnessing this debate, the problem is you, not my arguments. Girl, if I analyzed your grammar, I would have to quit my job, I didn't touch your grammar.The way I see you now, is a girl that gets home from school, goes to the fridge to get a juicebox, and sits at her computer on createdebate with her juicebox and slowly sips at it while concocting devious storms of nothing. No rhyme or reason, (sorry "clinical and cynical" you did rhyme once) and you do little more than cause hatred and use blanket terms to justify your standpoint which at this point, seems to be "kill the infidels".If you doubt my motives for even a second, you don't need to look further than the fact that while you have taken points away from each one of my arguments, I haven't touched your points. My goal is to debate, not engage in trivial politics concerning createdebate's extra features.