Many countries have tried to institute a democratic society, however, many of these societies seemed to have proven that "real" democracy is simply not feasible and not possible to attain. The US might be an example to consider, with the conflicts in their policies and so much disagreement, chaos, and so much unrest over what is right, especially in the postmodernist culture, where relativism dominates most worldviews and determines an individual's values. Even Switzerland, who was seen as a role model for direct democracy actually applies indirect democracy. Greece has also abandoned the model. It can be argued that direct democracy tends to bring about unrest, intolerance and injustice. So why do we still believe that democracy works and is still desirable? What's your take? Pls substantiate your arguments clearly.
When African leaders steal money, they don't keep it in African Banks to avoid suspicions and bank interrogations. They either keep it a water tank in their homes, in trunks or burry it in the underground of their homes. This does not make the West more corrupt but are when some of these African thieves launder huge sums of money into Western Banks so easily without any interrogations. Some even build huge hotels, and other types of wealthy properties in the West without any Western government investigating if their said profession's income tallies with the wealth they exhibit. The West are accomplices because they tax these thieves to their(west) economic benefit, The banks are worse off. I wouldn't say they are ignorant of the fact that all these are stolen monies because it is on that basis the Western countries accuse Africans as corrupt; because they know the huge sums that enter their countries every minute, day, week, month and year. If we talk of African corruption, the West are major role accomplices and culprits if there should be any charges. Banks that support money laundering are usually shut down, but no, the west won't do that. And yet they come out shamelessly to backstab their robbery team members by accusing their countries as corrupt. The west won't help Africa get these thieves yet they want Africans to help fight internet fraud just because they don't benefit from these type of African thieves. I fully support African fraud, where ever they are they should keep up with hard work. Infact they should work harder because if monies are stolen to the west and they become jobless, they must find a way to get back their monies from the west. What you call internet fraud is Africans taking back their monies invested into the West(pockets of citizens) by their "corrupt leaders". It's FAIR. Don't you agree?
I'm not asking if a belief itself can be morally right or wrong, but whether having a belief can be morally right or wrong.My argument (A) is this:(1a). You should not be blamed for doing something if you had no choice but to do it.(2a). You cannot choose what you believe or don't believe. Therefore, (3a). You should not be blamed for believing (or not believing) in something.Here is a second argument (B) to support premise (2a).(1b). What you believe (or don't believe) is the result of your environment and your genes.(2b). You cannot choose your environment or your genes.Therefore, (3b). You cannot choose what you believe or don't believe.You can probably extend these arguments to free will in general, if you say that your actions are based on your beliefs, but my intention in this debate is just to answer the question in the title. The reason I ask this question is that people seem to be constantly attacked (both on and off this website) for what they believe, whether religious, atheist, conservative, liberal, Nazi, communist, or anything really. I do not think these personal attacks are justified. I do not understand why people do not just try to kindly persuade others, as they can't help what they believe, and being kind is generally a much more effective way to make people think you are reasonable, and that you might be right.Unless you're a flat-earther, then your just a waste of space.
Pangolins are the number one most endangered species of animals in the world. There has been a massive debate between scientists, biologists, etc. on whether zoos should play apart in trying to save pangolins, so far there is no straight conclusion because of the evidence that is shown.But let's begin our own debate on what your opinion is about this subject...
Welcome one welcome all to the 2000's! It's the time when you can say 'Hi!' And be called a bully! It's where you can screw up one time and be called stupid. But wait! There's more! Drama is THE thing today! We hope you enjoy our bad drivers and loud neighbors!
What is your personal input on how the mind may function in Different situations?
For me, even when i was young to the point i could barely comprehend what people were thinking, I've always had an unchallenged view of how the mind may function as to different situations that everyone takes differently. What do you think? And are you someone like me who has analyzed everything possible about a person?
Chemical Attack in Syria Perpetrated by Zionists (Jews)
With Trump talking about getting out of Syria soon, it seems unlikely that Assad would want to draw attention to and invite deeper involvement of the US forces. There is a lot of money that will stop flowing to the Middle East if we remove our destructive force the cash to the powers who control the government will slow and they don't want that. Since the entire Middle Eastern conflict is about weakening the powers who threaten Israel and creating wealth for those who profit from war the conflict must continue.
In death only is Hawkins able attest to the fact or myth that heaven and hell are real. I guess he knows now. He would have a couple of files piled for the world to learn the truth. He cannot return or he would return with it. And no one can also travel to go get it from him where he is. Hmmmm the truth is to one man at a time. What did he had to lose in believing in Christ and at this time discovering if it was true or not; pride of excessive knowledge. And all that knowledge couldn't save him. If knowledge is life at least of all his body parts that may decay, his brain shouldn't because that is the source of his power. What is power if does not have authority over life. Knowledge, Money, Fame, Authority on earth, wise man Solomon says "vanity upon is vanity". Only Jesus saves.
Would society benefit from requiring expecting(new) parents, by law, to attend and pass a basic parenting class to become "certified" to raise their child? With the rise of school shootings and political polarity at dangerous highs, the purpose of these parenting classes would be to reduce the extremism from parents who raise their children improperly or at a sub-par level. Discuss any direct or implied consequences such as rights to reproduction, derivation of moral values, or bodily autonomy.
I've seen a lot of discussion regarding this topic and I've also seen the news media trying to dispute the "conspiracy theories" so I figure this could be a good debate topic and I'm curious what you all think.