Ethics Debate Topics for Students

For

• Ok, I agree with your definition of murder. Killing people can never be justified. The bible says "Thou shall not kill". Human life is sacred and should not ever be ended by another human being. Capital punishment is also horrible because that person is being murdered.
• Murder is always wrong. Human life is sacred and there is never any justification for ever killing another human being.

For

• Let me first start by once again thanking my opponent for setting it up and for everyone that took time out of their day to read it. ============ Case Pro- Rebuttals ============ Contention 1: "Individual capabilities aren't relevant to granting rights. "My opponent has made…
• I thank Nags for setting up this debate and increasing awareness on this topic. Given that the position I'm arguing for is vastly unpopular I would strongly encourage voters of a different persuasion to read my arguments carefully. ============= Case Pro- Rebuttals…

For

• I disagree, If families really wanted to go to A Wild Life Park, they would. Fundraisers, family event etc.
• Please excuse my spelling mistakes. It is difficult to type on a phone. Firstly, not all animals are at wild parks and secondly im sure many people would rather go to a Wild Life park and see animals run free and live in their natural habit than see a lion sleep or a Hippo…

For

• First Con has dropped many subjects like the China study. Giving Pro the advantage in those areas. "Vitamin B12 is critical for the health of the brain and nervous system and is primarily found in animal foods. A deficiency can cause all sorts of adverse effects on brain…
• Intro Con has dropped many of Pro's statements. Instead mentioning new possible nutritional deficiencies and calls propaganda "Despite all the propaganda, there isn't any evidence that vegan diets are any better than other diets. Most of the studies are observational in…

For

• They deserve to have their privacy considered
• Animals(like humans) want moments of privacy and public exhibition

For

• Musicians have to eat
• Theft is an assumption of property rights

For

• Sorry for the delayed response; I worked a 36 hour shift this weekend. Gotta love contract work. "My view is that there are objectively sound moral values. I think we can all agree on at least two fronts as to what is moral: we should value life, and we should value the quality…
• Welcome to my opponent! First let me say I consider personal experience to be quite valid and relevant, (provided the experience is a feasible one). Let me say that I am also a dog owner and a dog lover. I actually mix my own food for them because I think it is inhumane to feed…

For

• PrefaceThis debate is for Larz's World Online Debate Cup Tournament. I thank Arc for this opportunity to debate him and I look forward to an excellent round. Also, there is a 1,500 minimum ELO required to vote on this debate.Full TopicA just society ought to presume consent for…
• As agreed, I am passing on this round. Thanks again to Arc for a stellar debate and to Larz for hosting this tournament. Please VOTE PRO. Thank you.

For

• "You said that morality is timeless. It is not. Your contention was established as false, and then conceded by you in this statement." Morality does sometimes change, I can't argue with that. Unless of course objective morality exists, though I do not personally think it does.…
• My examples of moral and practical arguments were just examples; I was not implying that they were sound arguments. "Why are you debating something when you don't feel strongly about either side? It makes for a weaker debate." A debater should be able to argue equally strongly…

For

• My opponent has forfeited twice in this debate. This is impossible for him to recover from, as he has not produced any arguments, nor rebutted my case. He cannot use the 4th Round for arguments, as I would be unable to rebut those.
• My opponent has, unfortunately, forfeited the 2nd Round. This means that he has still not produced a case. He must provide it in the 3rd Round, otherwise it will be impossible for him to satisfy his Burden of Proof. I am also extending my arguments.

For

• I just wanted to test your mettle. The idea of animals being mindless automatons is completley obsolete. Sadly, this idea did exist at one point and that's how I heard of this concept. I heard the idea in my psychology class. Apparenlty psychologists used to think animals were…
• "Dogs may forget an event less than two minutes after it happened, according to a new study." James Owen, for National Geographic Animals are stupid. They only have a memory of less than two minutes. As for pain, that's just stimulus response. Think of a plant moving towards…

For

• This debate will be on whether or not preference utilitarianism condemns speceisism as morally wrong. I as Pro will seek to affirm the resolution by showing that speceisism conflicts with basic principles of preference utilitarianism. My opponent as Con will seek to negate my…
• In this round I will provide my case in the form of a syllogism to show that assigning special value based on speceis membership alone is inconsistent with principles on which preference utilitarianism is based on. Over the course of this debate my opponent and I will argue on…

For

• Bullfighting is too dangerous to humans to justify
• Bullfighting is a form of animal torture

For

• Well that being the case I guess there's no sense in a lengthy speech on voting issues. I tip my hat to Solon KR!
• Normally I try to be as nice as I can when responding to even the poorest of arguments, but the fact is the bulk of the case offered by my opponent is a straw-man fallacy right out of your college logic textbook (Chapter 3, Hurley's logic)Solon is possibly unfamiliar with…

For

• Looks like Aerogant is determined to debate this with me.Con will go first and leave the last round empty.
• Con has again dropped my arguments. I want to ask what's wrong with you Aerogant, you seem to be having a breakdown. Are you alright?In all cases my opponent was not able to uphold his BOP. This I understand is because he feels this debate is targeted to him when it's not. It's…

For

• And because my opponent has forfeited, I shall say I believe I have won this argument. :D
• That is a terrible argument. I can easily say, "He is a good man" and boom. Check mate.

For

• A child age, let"s say 10, has no need to learn the harsh realities of life. Forced child labour teaches children nothing. How will it help them when they reach rock bottom later in life? I have nothing wrong with the teaching of children about what to do in later life, but…
• its good because children children can get money get money" There are a plethora of other methods by which a child can obtain money, none of which involve working to the ground and/or crippling themselves for the rest of their lives because of a job which they were not…

For

• "In response to pro's point about eating a small amount of meat, I ask for evidence. Humans are able to tolerate eating meat, however this more likely suggests being designed to eat meat only in times of famine. My opponent also references the diet of cavemen, but has provided…
• con's main point is that if we don't need to eat meat, we shouldn't, cause "animals are people too". that's just an arbitrary stance that is not based on our design or the natural order. the natural order says eat or be eaten.... at the very least, eat. we may not be designed…

For

• Con says, "the role of the state is to stop us doing stupid things. It cannot be safe, so it must be stupid." If true, then every explorer, entrepreneur, policeman, fireman, participant in a risky occupation, or athlete in a risky sport is stupid. He says that if an activity…
• I claimed that if a person had no right to make dangerous choices, our choices would not be made by an all-seeing benevolent power, but rather by a government bureaucrat who is immune to risk yet will decide what is too risky for you. Con counters with a comparison to parents…

For

• Again, I extend my arguments.
• I extend my arguments.

For

• Great round Con!BOP Analysis In R2 and R3, Con has completely dropped my BOP analysis. Extend it.Rebuttals C1) Saves lives Con fails to establish causation for any of his claims, either that the lower class will be the main sellers or organs or that this will deteriorate health…
• Thanks Con! Prelude My opponent has not contested, and therefore has conceded, that the burden of proof is in fact shared. I'm also hoping that my opponent was not attacking my case by insinuating that I merely engaged in verbal diarrhoea. Moreover, our judges are more than…

For

• Con seems to attribute to me the opinion that behaviour slected for is "good". It is not objectively good or bad and could be judged to be either or neither depending your point of view. We already agree there ultimately is no good or evil. Similarly, these behaviours and…
• Morals is not separate from instinct. This is not confusion on my part, but actually a field of study with increasing validity. Search for evolution of morality or similar terms to find a wealth of information on the subject.The capacity for having moral feelings is biological…

For

• it's still hard to decipher a coherent message. but it seems straightforward enough to respond now. con says it means they gave up an organ so they want an organ back. no, only people who have died give organs for the most part, at least for teh purposes of this debate. that…
• con's points are to decipher and largely incoherent. i'll wait for further clarification so i know how to and what to respond.

For

• I accept. Definitions: morality-is the differentiation of intentions, decisions, and actions between those that are good (or right) and those that are bad (or wrong). Make your case.
• Okay, well can people at least vote on this so its not a complete and total waste. Just vote about his first argument and mine.

For

• When a dog loves a shark we can't tell him no why? Because no harm is done. When a dog bites it bites to kill Dogs need to learn respect. they need to be killed for biting. If a child kills someone do we blame the owner? No balme the child because it was probably raise in a…
• What should we do? have anarachy of dogs? Letit all destroy evertyhing? Theyre ppl too they need to be killed

For

• My opponent's argument is nothing but conjecture; unfounded and unsourced. I'd also like to point out that a national database does not imply globalisation; this debate was aimed at Western countries such as the USA, but I do not contest to having a global DNA database under…
• I believe DNA from every newborn should be collected via a simple and pain-free swab in the mouth and stored in the national database. Having the DNA of every citizen will have multiple benefits that outweigh any consequences: 1. Criminals (including rapists and murderers) will…

For

• I apologize to my opponent for forfeiting the last round. I did not get my argument posted in time. My conclusion is that if everyone went vegetarian, it would save a lot of animal's lives and it would give less money to huge industries. :)
• Animals have feelings, and they should be treated like equals. They have souls, and thoughts, and emotions. They do not deserve to be killed for the sake of being turned into a cheap, greasy hamburger. There could be more jobs created, because the demand for tofu and other…

For

• We Accept: That MORALITY exists, (However we are trying to come to a conclusion on what determines it.) That logic EXISTS and is self evident. However just because we both believe in logic does not make my opponent true. my oppoenet and I differ on the existence of free will. I…
• The First subject I would like to address is that my esteemed opponent claims that I have a fallacy within my argument. Then I will move on to illogical processes within his own. The fallacy he claims that I have displayed is the fallacy of hasty conclusion. "Use relevant but…

For

• RESOLVED: PETA in general, has had a positive effect in society Round one is for introductions and definitions, the rest will proceed like a three round debate. PETA: The orginaization known as People for the ethical treatment of animals
• I thank my oppnent for a good debate. "It would ruin a way of life many of these people have been doing that job for their whole life its all they know and have skills for. Yes it can be replaced by artificial fur but what about the families who's whole tradition and history is…

For

• Heavy scrutiny forces politicians to dedicate themselves fully to their public service
• The right to privacy is not absolute and is sacrificed in standing for public office

For

• I agree that these reasons are beneficial to people and to the industries, but they are not THAT crucial and do not outweigh the cruelty being done to get the production and money. Speaking in terms of humanity towards these animals, they do not need to be treated this way for…
• Inhumane for the purposes of this debate means "without compassion, knowingly causing misery or cruelty." The way animals are treated in factory farms is sickening and cruel. Their living conditions are filthy, with no room to move, no room to breathe and no room to live. These…

For

• Western countries already benefit from extremely liberal laws.
• The apparent loss of liberty is overstated.

For

• I will argue that in general, it is morally wrong to have a pet cat declawed. My opponent will argue that it is not. I ask that my opponent be respectful, and I will show the same courtesy.
• Since my opponent has forfeited his previous round, and this is my last, I will go ahead and sum up my argument as simply as I can. 1. It is morally wrong to harm any creature that can feel pain. 2. Cats can feel pain. 3. Declawing is an incredibly painful procedure that gives…

For

• Spanking is child abuse because it is wrong to touch people without consent. No one has the right to make another person feel unsafe. If you would not hit an adult, you should not hit a child. Everyone has the right to feel safe in their body. No one the right to another…
• Since the oppostion forfeited, please vote for me.

For

• let me say that the example given by my opponent was very weak because if the person who told the promise was very willing to attend, then that particular person may come earlier so that if theres an accidenty like the one being used,the person can prepare and if the person was…
• in my side i strongly believe that that breaking a promise is always immoral because it does not only give emotional pain it also makes people specially children to think that they are not loved once their parents broke their promise and lastly it will also promote the habit of…

For

• Any person trying to stop me from getting faded is getting shot with the CANNON! http://youtube.com...
• I also agree that the drinking age should be lowered. It's ridiculous that we are granted the right to jeopordize our lives and lungs through war and cigarettes but are denied the same opportunity with our liver. I know I kind of changed the resolution in the last part of my…

For

• I affirm the resolution resolved: It is morally permissible to kill one innocent person to save the lives of more innocent people. The value for this debate ought to be societal welfare, because society is the agent of the action this resolution encompasses, and because in…

For

• Our feelings and our empathy is irrelevant. The moral difference I speak of is one that ultimately says "killing mammals is morally wrong and killing other animal classes is not." If our level of empathy should decide whether killing something is wrong or not, then a man…
• I find it hard to see any moral differences between killing a cow and a fly. It doesn't really matter whether it is good or bad; either way we get the same result. Both are non-sentient animals that have been produced naturally via evolution and yet many who condemn the various…

For

• Starting out, you refer briefly to the Couetzfeldt-Jakob syndrome. My only point in rementioning it was due to your statement "First off I am attacking your rationale that leads you away from eating human meat." It served to show that my rationale was valid, and those that must…
• You begin your argument by attacking my rationale that leads me away from eating human meat. To reiterate, my first claim was that humans are not part of our food chain and, furthermore, anthropophagy can lead to Couetzfeldt-Jakob syndrome. I would first like to point out that…

For

• My opponent has graciously informed me in the "comments" section that (s)he is forfeiting the round, since adding arguments in the last round would be unfair. I applaud Con's considerateness in letting me know this in advance and her/his dedication to the ethics of debate.…
• If my opponent will indulge me, I'd like to tell a personal experience that I think help us rethink what it means to be "human." As a resident of the United States of America, I have read about and even seen firsthand the effects of dehumanization within my homeland. I am…

For

• "newspapers_are_cool", I challenge you to another debate that I hope you'll accept... This round will be a round of acceptance. My simple definition of vegetarianism is the abstention from the consumption of animals (animalia), for moral, religious or health reasons. Thank you.
• Thank you, 'newspapers_are_cool', your round has been, as ever, most interesting. 1) I agree that I may have overlooked your 'meat benefits' somewhat, but only because meat has significant, and very real risks. If I was able to buy an asbestos hair-dryer, I would choose not to,…

For

• (Sorry, I accidentally posted twice as you can see) I do agree that it is morbid to raise those animals in those conditions. But we might as well be doing them a favor to put them out of their misery. When you said 'raised and killed just to be eaten', This is just a form of…
• (First debate on this website ayuda me por favor) Eating animals may seem like a morbid activity from a vegetarian's point of view, But it is natural in human nature. To begin with, Meat contains a large amount of raw protein and nutrients that is beneficial to human health.…

For

• "A quote from the Declaration of Independence states that men are created equal, and that they receive certain rights. It is unjust to deny a human these rights at birth because they do not classify as a person, which is a way of interrupting what my opponents believes. I feel…
• I would first like to address the definition of person. In philosophy, personhood is not limited to human beings; it looks at qualities that most humans have that make the vast majority of humans, persons. If he wants a recorded definition, I'll give Mary Ann Warren's. In her…

For

• Well, my opponent has forfeited, so I see no other choice to vote for the affirmative. I would like to take a moment and hope those that read my argumentation is actually facts and have the articles, now I realize this will and may never happen because of the politics and…
• Well, I was hoping for a more serious argument. I do not see how the sale of human organs will kill more people than save. Also the procedure will be the same as any other transplant, they will not rip the organs out, this is the 21st century with medical advancements made this…

For

• Since Con has forfeited Round 3, I will proceed to justify the killing and consumption of animals as a source of protein. Biologically speaking, humans have evolved/adapted to be omnivorous creatures. Our bodies require the nutrients, specifically the fatty acids and proteins,…
• Since Con has forfeited Round 2, I will refrain from posting an argument, so that Con is not at a disadvantage. Should Con forfeit Round three as well, I will be forced to post the entirety of my argument and suggest that Con shows poor conduct. I hope to continue our debate in…

For

• There is no denying it, a majority of cheaters never feel bad for the ones they hurt, and the only ones who do only feel bad for a few days Here is proof supporting this: https://www.elitedaily.com... also, all of their reasons to cheat are inexcuseable "i was drunk" People who…
• Yeah but if you cheat on a math test, you still cheated on a match test, that will forever be in your records as a cheater, so technically your still a cheater there, i just countered all of your arguments with one statement

For

• I agree with you but only partial, yes if cigarettes came into use were found to be beneficial for health (Sic1) What we know today as it was a big mistake. But it was the same with other inventions, such as X-rays when the when the first X-ray tube was patented by Willhelm…
• I have mixed feelings about this. Some people will case that it will deminish chance of people genius born this way. But I think it bring more good than harm. I wll glad to know you opinion about this.

For

• You are welcome.My ArgumentActually, studies have proved that a life with animal products is a healthier life. For example, milk gives you more calcium then anything that's vegetarian. Humans have lived longer with products such as what you stated. Most animals are put to peace…
• Agreed.

For

• A utilitarian approach will result in a decision that saves the largest number of lives possible.
• The human right to life compels us to save as many as possible

For

• Victory!
• Before I begin I didn't define milk. By milk I meant cow's milk. Milk " a white liquid produced by a woman to feed her baby or by female animals to feed their young; especially : milk from cows or goats that is used as food by people : a white liquid produced by a plant" [1]…