Equality truly doesnt exist. Why fight for it?
If we still havent reached equality then why do we even fight for it? People will always truly be stronger and some will be weaker. Exceptions dont count for everybody. Why fight for equality. Should we even fight for it anymore?
Still fight for it
Side Score: 8
|
 |
It is futile to fight for it
Side Score: 5
|
|
|
|
|
3
points
Yes. Fighting for it so far has brought about major change. The most well known fight was for African-American equality and that was a true battle. It was a scary battle. With cases like the murder of Emmett Till people saw this an decided to fight and stand for equality. We had riots, marches, and many great leaders come up for rights they should already have. Cases like Little Rock High School was a huge message. Eisenhower even supported the protection of the African-Americans that began to attend the school. Slowly ever since the Civil War the fight for African-American equality has shown to be effective. Leaders like Rosa Parks were a moral boost for African-American which lead to the bus boycotts. The four African-Americans that sat inside of the "white" part of a restaurant took a lot but showed tqo messages to the world. One was that the will power they had woupd not break and they will stand for whats right. Second is that this method of no retaliation made the whites appear to be bullies to the world because they were pouring drinks on them, spitting, hitting, and putting ketchup on them and they sat there. One of the biggest leaders, Thurgood Marshall, showed us that African-Americans can achieve a lot and this lead to the victory of the Brown vs Board of Education case. Althea Gibson was the first African-American female tennis player and she showed the world that they coupd achieve great things. The most well known person, Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. showed the world how a dream could bring about the changing tides for African-Americans. He is the figure of African-American power. Change must be fought for. Side: Still fight for it
1
point
2
points
A crime free society doesn't exist and never will, so should we just give up and fire all the police because we will never wipe out crime completely? Just because we can't achieve total equality or total peace doesn't mean we can't make progress towards those goals. Some equality is better than none. Side: Still fight for it
1
point
1
point
It uses exactly the same logic. The logic in the debate description is, if we can't achieve total equality, why try at all? The crime scenario is exactly the same. If we can't achieve total peace, why try at all? I used the crime scenario to point of the flaw in the core logic of the argument which is, if you can't achieve something completely, why try at all. Side: Still fight for it
1
point
|
I won't be against actually fighting for this 'equality', even if it isn't achievable. However, there comes a tipping point in relation to the people and their government. One will consume the other, and both will be destroyed as a result. So all we can do is really just buy ourselves some time in regards to 'equality'. Side: It is futile to fight for it
Equality is significant only when it comes to money and freedoms acknowledged by the state. Under the provisions of the private sector there can only be equality when the majority of its people feel it is necessary. If the state becomes involved in maters pertaining to the private sector, not only the loss of individual freedoms will prevail but will infidelity create immunities to the said party, and the said party under national criticism, will eventually take powers over national government and culture will be impermanently altered or changed. Changes and alteration can also be made permanent if no opposition are made. Side: It is futile to fight for it
|
