- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Well, as I see it, 'he who pays the piper calls the tune'.
I assume Andy's strategy was to create a liberal self regulating site but unfortunately, his trust in us, me included, was betrayed and he found it necessary to establish some basic ground rules to stop the forum from imploding.
In a nutshell, my interpretation of the rules is;- keep to the topic, don't make personal insults and state your viewpoints in a civilised manner without blatant or disguised profanities.
I find these requirements quite easy to understand and abide by, despite spiteful provocation.
You mad or something? Do you think acting like a crybaby about him is gonna make him quit or get fired?
You need to work hard on getting BEHIND an up-and-coming opposition candidate and save your energy for positive warfare.
Fighting him with hate won't work, all the candidates in the 2016 election tried that (painting him as a villain) tactic and look what happened. Work on painting your candidate as a hero, then he has to play that game instead (and he'll lose).
Why can't that candidate be you? If the game is so rigged it couldn't be you, then why get worked up about the rigged game? If you can win, RUN FOR PRESIDENT RUSTICUS!
Pointing and moaning isn't how you change the world.
Yes, but there are many apparent proponents of free speech who will object vehemently when someone who is exercising this fundamental right states something to which they take exception or perceive as an insult.
To many free speech is fine as long as it stays within the parameters of what they consider to be correct and proper.
The truth hurts, so the ''PSEUDO'' champions of free speech will try to tarnish the right of freedom of expression as a hate speech and an incitement to violence, if the address is critical of them or any aspect of their life.
To all intents and purposes, and to a greater or lesser extent, freedom of speech is a myth.
For instance;- anyone going to the Falls Road in Belfast and making a critical speech about Irish Republicanism and/or Gerry Adams, would be leaving the Falls Road either in an ambulance or a hearse.
To maintain equality I would also assert that anyone going to the Shankill Road in Belfast and making a speech condemning Unionism or the Orange Order would suffer a fate worse than death.
So, we can only have selective free speech.
That is free speech to audiences who agree in principle with your message.
I mean read the book
But I have more than once
that offers the God who paid the price for all sinners,
A claim without proof ,and if god paid the “price “ for all sinners why are they then punished in the next life
Do you knoiw what sin is?
I don’t recognize the term “ sin “
It is missing the mark and trasgressing God's Law
Which god ? Which gods law ?
. This applies to me as well. Are you willing to turn from your sin, and receive Jesus as your God, Lord, and Savior?
I don’t recognize the term sin and I don’t believe in nonsense
There’s no proof to this claim constantly put forward by a sizable amount of Christians
I would actually take it a step further and state that Atheists have higher moral ethics as they do not do ethical things out of fear of a god or for a reward in the next life or because a god is watching them
Christians can also hide behind their religion and use it to , victimise , brutalise and oppress others all because it’s what god wants
I don’t even know what this is meant to mean at this stage
Well you don't know the difference between a fetus an adult and a baby
Considering you spent the whole thread saying a fetus was a baby at last you’re starting to get it that a fetus is not a “ baby “ ,
Why you’re blaming me for what you have only eventually grasped is beyond me .
So when you use your logic to fit your narrative, it's cool, but then somehow it doesn't work when I use the same reasoning to fit my narrative?
You don’t use “ reasoning “ I’ve said from the start a fetus has zero rights to sustenance or useage of a womans body and it’s a woman’s choice whether to abort or not , you have never attempted to address or answer what I asked from the outset as you continue to do a ridiculous dance around terms , why’s that ?
Let’s cut to the chase in an attempt to avoid your childish attempts to avoid actually answering what I keep asking , should a woman have a choice to prevent a life been born or not , if not why not ?
Would you like me to use a different argument? Fine. Let me set the scene:
You're a slaveowner. Your slaves try to revolt. You kill some of them because they're on your land and rely on you to survive, so it's your choice on whether or not to kill them. Doesn't that seem immoral?
Why theses ridiculous analogies ? Is this another avoidance tactic by you ?
Why do you assume you have the right to tell a woman whether she can abort or not ?
And yet you fail to realize your own...
What a “ superb “ reply
So what’s your point as I’m addressing the ignorance of the O P as in “ you will get shot in other countries “ , so you disagree with him also yet curiously you’re attempting a defence
No it’s not “ ignorant “ what’s ignorant is your counter , let’s have some facts ....
That dispute your “ they don’t happen every week “ , well yes they do 1 a week on average actually , making you wrong ......again
reported school shootings in America since 2013
school shootings reported so far in 2018
school shooting per week, on average
I think Religious people cannot believe in luck, cause is it just luck that your god exist, because when luck exist (which it doesn't) everyone is equal in strength, efficiency, and power, and that would be insulting your god, saying "Oy! yah you god up there! I'm equal with you! You're no greater than me! you're just up there with supernatural powers because you're lucky!" that sounds like a 2 year old fighting over a toy! instead drop the luck, confess your weakness, like I did to the lord, "JESUS CHRIST", cause is it just luck he did what he did on the cross??
What a truly ignorant statement
Okay, maybe you won't get shot, but in places like Quebec, your business will get shut down if your writing is in the wrong language.
You get shot in America sometimes at schools just for being there
Alright, that's ignorant. You say it happens sometimes like it's extremely common, but it doesn't. Sandy Hooks and Columbines don't happen every week.
why would Atheist be cool??like where is the hope in it??? because who wants to think "you just get this one life, live it, because when you're dead, YOU'RE DEAD!"
have you ever seen someone do something horrible and thought "I Just Want this guy to get what he deserves!", and that guy doesn't get caught, then what?? He didn't get what he deserved, but for Christians, if that guy didn't repent during his life, he go to hell, and pay for what he did!! or when Christ comes back, and judgement comes for everyone, that guy will be judged, and every sin he committed would be brought into the open, and just Imagine the embarrassment and guilt he will suffer, that would be ultimately satisfying!!
It's fine to say Merry Christmas, regardless of who you say it to and what their beliefs are. I say Merry Christmas to my Muslim friends, Happy Hanukkah to my Christian friends, and celebrate Eid-Al-Fitr with my Jewish friends. No one gets offended, and no one should have to be restricted in what they say regarding holidays.
You aren't wrong. You just have no party to actually get anything done with. So be Conservative and vote for the closer of the two to common sense. The Abolitionists during Lincoln's day were Republican, per say, but did ally with them because it was the only way to get ANY of the things they wanted and believed in.
We have strict gun control in many areas yet they are the areas where gun violence is at a high. I live in a very rural area and everyone has many guns yet no one is shooting each other. So I don't think that guns are the problem. I have an AR with a bumpstock and my children and friends have a lot of fun shooting it. Why should I be held accountable for the actions of a very small percentage of the people in this country? I support harsher punishment for committing a crime with a firearm. I support the death penalty for people who murder innocent people. I support age limitations on violent movies and video games that glorify murder and killing indiscriminately. This problem is new and guns in a household is not a new thing. I would be willing to say that 40 to 50 years ago the number of households with firearms per capita was higher than it is today yet was no problem. Something changed maybe that is what we should focus our energy on
If you did your research you would realize that Law Enforcement is responsible for a large number of the gun deaths that are quoted all of the time. Many are LEO's killing themselves with guns, Yes that is part of the homicide by gun stat. suicide makes up a whopping 40% of the gun deaths in those stats.
The government doesn't do much well, the less control of our lives the government has the better life will be.
You claim that people should have to be trained as parents (by the government)? That is a scary thought. I would like to point out this observation the people who have committed horrible violent crimes have siblings that were very normal they were raised by the same parents in the same household. Maybe it's unfair to jump to the bad parenting excuse.
Sniveling cowards with skinny arms have to have a gun hidden on them to feel
brave enough to walk into a grocery store and buy a gallon of milk.
So cowardly they pretend they need the school shooter weapon
of choice to shoot a deer.
Apparently they walk into the woods and spray bullets in all directions.
Anybody who needs more than 5 rounds to kill a deer shouldn't be
allowed anywhere near a gun or a rifle or even a damn squirt gun.
Guns are not the problem people are the problem and there is no magic pill that will prevent the next tragedy. If we are saying 21 is the legal age then the Draft age must go to 21, the voting age must go to 21. Violent movies and Video games must be illegal for anyone under 21. Parents allowing their minor children to play violent video games must be jailed and their children taken away as these activities are associated with a desensitization of gun violence and death. If this is the road you want to go down it does no good to only remove a couple of specific tools that have caused well less than 1% of all death by firearms. It's like most political bureaucracy it serves no purpose it's just political posturing
"No automatic firearms of any description to be issued to the general public"
Automatic firearms are not sold legally in the USA without a special Federal fire arms license (anything is legal if you pay the government) laws don't change that.
"All rifles would be of a single shot type"
I wonder if you realized that only a very small amount of gun homicides are committed with rifles. You have no idea how to prevent violent criminal behavior. There are millions of people who own rifles and less than 1% have used their rifles to commit a crime. I fail to see how your logic fixes anything.
"Personal protection weapons should not exceed a calbre greater than .38"
So you are okay with killing people with a 9mm but not a .357 there is some intelligent thinking.
So in your opinion the government which has proven that it doesn't do anything well would implement a fool proof system, LOL How does the logic train always get from legally purchased firearms are the cause of the most gun related deaths, UNTRUE. Yet almost all fatal automobile homicides are from a legally purchased automobile. Interesting that you would think that because an oppressive government outlaws something you think murderers would not be able to acquire a firearm. Just like illegal drugs can't be purchased by those who want them. Or better yet our government is proven to supply both illegal drugs and illegal weapons in order to fund their covert activities.