I propose a choice-theoretic approach to debates. Two parties disagree over multiple issues. Resolution is based on the sets of arguments that are available to each party. Under two axioms, “free disposal” and “procedure invariance”, the resolution is shown to display a “status quo bias”. The exact form of the bias depends on the kind of argument involved – “pro” or “con” arguments. Using an extended model, I show that when parties use both pro and con arguments, only the latter type affects the debate’s resolution.