Con ~ Round 1

i think girls shouldn't play rugby because, most girls find it a rough game and think that it should really be for fast angry people, (like boys) nevertheless, i do think that some girls like to play rugby, but i think most girls don't want to, therefore, teachers should stop inviting rugby coches, for the school to be taught because some people ,dont want to be taught rugby.

Pro ~ Round 1

My opponent's resolution is that no girl should play rugby given that many girls do not like it.

The fact that some girls do not enjoy the sport is no grounds for eliminating it from the curriculum. So long as there is *some* demand and *some* girls do wish to play rugby, what justification is there for not allowing it?

Following through with my opponent's logic, we should ban anything and everything under the sun simply because people have different tastes.

Con ~ Round 2

i do not agree because that do you see any girls playing rugby on the tv i dont. kleptin i dont think that you understand that girls just dont like rugby and may i ask i am not being rude but are you a girl yourself, if so you should know that girls dont like rugby and most of them dont enjoy it. some girls dont have the right strength to play rugby,therefore it does not suit them well.

Pro ~ Round 2

"i do not agree because that do you see any girls playing rugbyhttp://www.debate.com/...
Debate.com - Post Your Next Argument on the tv i dont. kleptin i dont think that you understand that girls just dont like rugby and may i ask i am not being rude but are you a girl yourself, if so you should know that girls dont like rugby and most of them dont enjoy it. some girls dont have the right strength to play rugby,therefore it does not suit them well."

Logical fallacy, ad hominem argument. Opponent violates the rules of debate by attempting to discard by prior post on the basis of my own personal attributes (in this case, my sex).

Attached below- A link from the Rugby football league showing a video of the Female Rugby League, clearly showing female rugby players enjoying themselves, playing rugby.

http://www.therfl.co.uk/...

I don't think I need to say anything else. Please vote correctly.

Con ~ Round 3

that is just 30 girls wanting to play rugby, this is the uk we are talking about. http://video.google.com/...=. this website shows girls playing rugby, but in the stands i saw 5 people max. that shows how much anyone cares. Secondly, i have not said that we should ban it, i have said that girls should play rugby outside of school, instead of boring girls who do not want anything to do with rugby at all at school, when they could be playing sports that they want to play. yes, by all means we should have maybe a session in school for girls to see what it is like, then they can play outside of school if they want to carry on.

make the right decision, vote for me.

Pro ~ Round 3

My opponent has offered a very disorganized attempt at expressing his argument.

First of all, the resolution is phrased as a question, which is incorrect.

Second, my opponent's position is simply that girls should not play rugby. However, his opening post further specified that schools should simply stop teaching rugby to girls COMPLETELY

"therefore, teachers should stop inviting rugby coches, for the school to be taught because some people ,dont want to be taught rugby."

on the basis that:

1. "it should really be for fast angry people"
2. "i think most girls don't want to"

Third, My opponent then CHANGES his argument in the second round into a cheap ad hominem argument that does not address any of my points whatsoever.

Finally, my opponent makes a claim that is a complete and total lie:

"i have said that girls should play rugby outside of school, instead of boring girls who do not want anything to do with rugby at all at school"

Nowhere in previous posts has my opponent stated this concession. My opponent has CHANGED HIS ARGUMENT AGAIN, without addressing any of my points. He then added a new argument

3. People don't care about girls playing rugby

****************

Since my opponent no longer has a chance to respond, to clarify any of my points would just be for the audience.

My opponent's first claim that rugby is just for fast, angry people and limiting that group to just boys is sexist and factually incorrect. This is no basis for trying to get rid of rugby in schools for girls.

My opponent's second claim is claim by popularity. My opponent believes that rugby is too rough for girls because of a society enforced image of what girls are and are not supposed to like. There is therefore no justification in this argument either

My opponent's third claim that I do not understand this issue because I am not a girl is fallacious and does not deserve more clarification or mention.

My opponent's fourth claim is that the video he provided showed that the spectators were scarce, meaning, no one cares. In that case, I need only point out that the stands were packed in the video I provided. In any case, this is a null point because it doesn't matter how POPULAR it is, so long as the players enjoy it.

******************

In conclusion, my opponent has offered no justification for his opinions. All of his arguments were worthless under the light and held no weight. He has also changed his argument twice from start to finish.