Forum Dude's Guide To Successful Online Debate


The key to conducting a successful online debate has many factors. For instance, if your opponent defends his position using an article from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, don't fall into the trap of actually responding to the content of said article. Simply look for a different article more suited to your point of view, and then use that information as though it automatically refutes your opponent's article. Remember, less is more.

Think tanks can be a fantastic resource when looking for articles that back up your point of view. One of my favorites is the Center for American Progress. The advantage here is two-fold. Not only do you have the convenience of using someone else's comprehensive research at the simple click of a mouse without having to waste your time bothering with primary sources, but you also give the illusion that you are in fact citing a reputable study, and who can argue with that? Groups like the CAP are especially useful as they work under the guise of non-partisanship, making the illusion even greater. However, if you notice that your opponent is also using information from think tanks, be sure and point that out. Just as long as no one catches the hypocrisy of your action, it will make your opponent appear less credible.

Then, when all else fails, you can just write off the facts you don't like as "irrelevant," even when it directly pertains to your opponent's point that you are so eager to refute. And when you find that you can't refute his statements with actual pinpoint logic, you can always just look online for an unscientific study (or even an unscientific poll). Even if the study (or poll) doesn't actually prove anything other than the prevailing biases of academia, use it anyway. It couldn't hurt.

And just in case you fear that maybe your message isn't getting across, it's always a good idea to offer occasional reminders of how brilliant you are in a chosen field (history, for instance), and, by contrast, how dumb or ignorant your opponent is. This is the first strategy taught in most debate classes. Even if your ability to cite history is limited to copying and pasting random links that you found on Google under the search words "Bush crappy record," it still never hurts to try and convince your opponent that you are in fact smarter than they are. If nothing else, it will at least make you feel better, and confidence is the key to victory.

And don't worry too much about content. There are lots of dedicated researches who have already done all the dirty work for you, so all you need to do is sit back, post a few hyperlinks and scatter a few one or two-sentence captions to explain each one. And as mindless as that may sound, don't let it deter you from reminding your opponent of your brilliance. After all, he doesn't believe the things you believe, so you don't have to prove a thing to him! If you try to elaborate on your positions or offer any original ideas or detailed justifications, you'll just tire yourself out. Remember, dedicated researches have already done that work for you. The search engine is your best friend!

Lastly (and this is key), never, EVER let your opponent have the last word. If you run out of ideas, or feel that you no longer have anything of substance to offer, just keep arguing. This is a great time for you to employ strategy #1 as I outlined in the first paragraph, citing random second-hand sources as though they are irrefragable evidence of your position, while at the same time mocking your opponent's sources (and, more imporantly, your opponent).

If you follow these simple steps, I guarantee you will be successful in debate. After all, sooner or later your opponent will have to grow tired of your ranting and just walk away. And when you have the last word, my friend, you win! Be sure to let your opponent know it, and celebrate your brilliant victory!

The Goth Paradox




I have always been drawn to gothic music: the over-the-top spooky fashions, the gloomy, poetic lyrics, and of course, all those minor chords. When I was fifteen, I discovered Marilyn Manson’s Antichrist Superstar CD, and it was like opening Pandora’s Box. I was in love, and for a while I didn’t really care if any other music existed on Earth. It was haunting, dark, angry, disdainful, loud, rebellious, beautiful, anarchistic, carefree, inspirational, mysterious and complex all at the same time.

My dad, however, didn’t share my enthusiasm, and understandably so.

I, for one, thought I had hidden the CD quite cleverly, but apparently kids have been hiding forbidden objects between their mattresses since the time of Moses, so it was only a matter of time before my dad found me out, and then it was bye-bye Manson (and for a while, it was bye-bye social life). In spite of this musical repossession, I still had a very keen interest in gothic music. A seed had been planted, and it was growing by the day. Of course, I knew that the only way my dad would ever approve of my listening to such music was if I managed to find some with a Christian message. Fat chance, right?

Then I discovered Rackets and Drapes.

The first time I listened to Rackets and Drapes, I was blown away. These guys were dressing like Manson, singing about child molesters, domestic violence and abortions, and they were Christians. I was sixteen when I acquired a copy of their Candyland CD, and it would forever change my outlook about the boundaries of Christian music, as well as my outlook on the Christian music scene in general. What really fascinated me was the fact that these candid, incredibly-controversial musicians were more open about their faith than many of the less-threatening Christian alternative acts like MxPx and Ghoti Hook. From there I went on to discover other great Christian goth acts like Saviour Machine, Torn Skin, Circle of Dust and others. Arguably, many of these groups helped to forge my love of electronic music in general, not only within the goth scene but beyond.

What interests me is the paradox of trying to reconcile Christian faith and ministry with social characteristics typically associated with issues like Satanism, Wicca, existentialism and the macabre. The key difference, obviously, is found in the lyrical content. A casual observer might look at Cradle of Filth and Rackets & Drapes and think that the two bands were cut from the very same mold. An analysis of the lyrics, however, reveals that the two bands represent vastly different worldviews. It becomes a matter of who—or what—is being glorified through the music.

There is certainly nothing new about the idea of Christian musicians adapting to counter culture. Back when heavy metal music was still being actively decried as a tool of Satan, bands like Stryper were rocking “To Hell With the Devil.” They had their share of controversy, and even today there are still some in the Christian community who are uncomfortable with the idea of “Christian rock” in general, but regardless of where you stand on the issue, the boys from Stryper were out there glorifying Christ in a culture where Satan was often used as a mascot and long-haired rockers were admired for their sexual promiscuity. If anything, Stryper were the true rebels. Alice Cooper once said in a London Sunday Times interview, “Drinking beer is easy. Trashing your hotel room is easy. But being a Christian, that’s a tough call. That’s real rebellion.”

There’s nothing like creating a counter culture within a counter culture.

But how far is too far? How deeply can a band immerse itself into a given culture without assimilating to the ways of that culture? The dark side to the goth-Christian fusion is the fact that many such artists have a history of blurring the lines, usually after establishing themselves within the industry. I’ll give you some examples.

Rackets and Drapes has always been a controversial act, but late in their career they began to grow especially edgy (and for them, that’s saying something). At one point they posted a viciously anti-Islamic article on their website, at another point they decorated the front page of their website with an animated image of a naked woman—presumably a stripper—shown from behind, rear end fully exposed. They also showed strong support for the transgender movement, linking their website to The Gender Tree and incorporating artwork that suggested a keen fascination for women’s clothing. My purpose here isn’t to argue whether or not these things—in any given context—are acceptable for a self-described Christian band; I would venture that you are intelligent enough to make up your own mind on that. I would, however, make the argument that if there was an award for Christian artists pushing the envelope, Rackets and Drapes would win in a landslide. Whether right or wrong, this serves to further complicate the line between gothic and Christian music.

My second example is Evanescence. When they started out in the late 90s, they frequently opened for Christian bands and performed for youth groups, ultimately developing a reputation as a Christian band. This reputation was further established by comments made early on by former guitarist and cofounder Ben Moody, who once said in an interview with Stranger Things magazine, “The message we as a band want to convey more than anything is simple—God is love.” Later on, though, the band began to deny ever having any affiliation with the Christian music industry whatsoever.

Similar could be said of Klayton (AKA Klay Scott, AKA Scott Albert, AKA Dred, AKA Deathwish), founder and frontman of Circle of Dust and Celldweller. Rather than denying any former ties with the CCM, however, Klayton has simply—and very publicly—severed all ties. In a profanity-laced interview with HM magazine, he declared quite candidly:

“I was born and raised in a ‘Christian' household. I had no choice. When you're a kid, you do as you're told. (My parents did what they felt right and I hold no blame towards them whatsoever. ) I spent most of my youth in church learning to fear eternal damnation if I looked at someone the wrong way or entertained an ‘evil' thought. God forbid I was even remotely human. Enter pubescence and ‘young adulthood.' By this point my brainwashing is almost complete. I am a droid doing ‘the work of the Lord'???? No, doing big church-man's version of ‘the work of the Lord' actually. Now I'm getting older and starting to commit the unforgivable crime — I'm doubting.”

Blasphemous or humbling? You decide. After examining all of these examples, I have come to some basic conclusions. Gothic music traditionally stems from a sort of despair or disenfranchisement, and even though it may traditionally be considered inappropriate for Christians in the music industry to think outside the long-established box, I would go so far as to say that without that element of inappropriateness (however acceptable or disgraceful it may be), there could be no good gothic music in the Christian scene. If you need proof, just look at the “goth”-influenced music by bands like Skillet, Mortal and Audio Adrenaline (remember “Some Kind of Zombie?”). These artists, as talented as they may be, cannot do gothic music because they’re too much at peace with the world. Gothic music has always appealed to those who truly struggle in life, whether it be with faith, identity, self-esteem or purpose. These sorts of characteristics are common among Christians and non-Christians alike, the only difference being that Christians are often afraid to express them due to guilt or fear of rebuke. So in true Shakespearean fashion, the Christian goth scene is a place for outsiders in the Christian community just as the mainstream goth scene is a place for outsiders in the larger society.

I want to reiterate yet again that I am not trying to argue whether this is right or wrong; I’m speaking from a strictly observational standpoint, and personally I think that a convincing case could be made on either side. On the one hand, you could argue that even the Bible is filled with melodramatic musing and self-loathing by deeply-flawed and even sinful people (King David, anyone?) which serves to strengthen the faith of others, and on the other hand you can make the argument—and a truly valid argument at that—that the Christian music scene ought to be a safe haven for parents concerned about their children’s listening habits, and should therefore be held to higher standards of content. Either way, gothic music will remain a podium for the frustrated, the confused and the downtrodden to express their grievances, and I will make the argument that if there was only joy, peace and optimism in the world, and everybody had their act together, then gothic music could not exist in any format.

Sorry, Skillet.