CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Should psuedo-intellectual faggots be deported to Antartica?
Ever noticed how some people like Aveskde and EnigmaticMan are so impressed with themselves because they may have some academic accomplishment or may have scored a few points above average on an IQ test? Do these people make you want to puke? I say deport them to Antartica. Since they possess such god-like intellectual prowess, they can stop the fucking polar caps from melting. Send Al Gore with 'em.
Why? Why am I a danger to society? It's kind of funny how you excuse certain groups from their over-the-top rape, robbery and murder statistics, but you think I am dangerous because I point out those statistics? You are an utter fool. I almost called you a moron, but that would be an ill label because you probably have a decent IQ, you are just an educated fool, not a moron. I suggest you experiment with psychedelics in order to burst out of that squalid box which encapsulates your mind. You have been told what to think all of your life... why not attempt thinking on your own, for once? Or, would that make you dangerous as well? Glenn Beck is a bitch. I don't know any of the others you mentioned.
It's kind of funny how you excuse certain groups from their over-the-top rape, robbery and murder statistics, but you think I am dangerous because I point out those statistics?
Dead horse really.
You are an utter fool. I almost called you a moron, but that would be an ill label because you probably have a decent IQ, you are just an educated fool, not a moron.
Part of what I mean. The belief that education facilitates being a fool.
I suggest you experiment with psychedelics in order to burst out of that squalid box which encapsulates your mind.
Without knowing my beliefs you are in no position to comment about them.
You have been told what to think all of your life... why not attempt thinking on your own, for once? Or, would that make you dangerous as well?
Oh, I don't know your beliefs? What the fuck have you been sharing this past week that I've been on here, O vocal one? Were you sharing someone else's beliefs? Feel free to point out to me how I am dishonest.
Oh, I don't know your beliefs? What the fuck have you been sharing this past week that I've been on here, O vocal one? Were you sharing someone else's beliefs? Feel free to point out to me how I am dishonest.
I was sharing facts. My beliefs were rarely brought up.
You are mimicking a person's online identity in order to humiliate them. That is severely dishonest.
To you fact is something that you make up as you go along. Rarely do you even keep your stories consistent, and yet somehow you think your superior. Look up the word inferior and you will find that best describes you. Somehow the definition will be equivocal or sophistry. The problem with this is that it lacks logical coherency and critical thinking and so there must be a logical error on your part.
To you fact is something that you make up as you go along.
Projection? I have a very good memory and years of memorised facts and trivia at my disposal.
Rarely do you even keep your stories consistent, and yet somehow you think your superior.
Complex topics seem that way to the uninitiated.
Somehow the definition will be equivocal or sophistry. The problem with this is that it lacks logical coherency and critical thinking and so there must be a logical error on your part.
You seem to think that switching between meanings with a word that ties them together is valid argument. It isn't, and I frequently have to correct you for making this mistake.
Personal views and the projection of them are not facts, they are only opinions. Learn the difference.
Nothing is complex. The simple minded deem what they do not yet understand as complex.
It is you that switch the meanings of words to fit whatever you wish, I simple post the definition of words. The incorrect use of them, I leave to you.
Nothing is complex. The simple minded deem what they do not yet understand as complex.
Then you are very uninitiated to the world. If a genius and prodigy admit to reality having complex problems, yet you deny this, then it must speak ill of your capacity to determine what is simple.
It is you that switch the meanings of words to fit whatever you wish, I simple post the definition of words. The incorrect use of them, I leave to you.
People complicate things in order to make themselves look important. It takes one of little brains to attempt to confuse somebody, it takes one of vast intelligence to simplify things.
People complicate things in order to make themselves look important. It takes one of little brains to attempt to confuse somebody, it takes one of vast intelligence to simplify things.
You're not vastly intelligent, you are ignorant. There is a difference. Ignorance begets confidence.
People who support inter-racial marriages are people who are 'racist'. Why? You are probably wondering. Well because that individual obviously believes in the destruction of another culture and race.
I'm 'racist' not how I explained but how the world views it, for my own reasons. Which, I do not feel I want to express right now, since, that is not the topic of this debate.
People who support inter-racial marriages are people who are 'racist'. Why? You are probably wondering. Well because that individual obviously believes in the destruction of another culture and race.
I'm interracial and I have preserved the values of both parents' culture. I also have not destroyed a race, since part of it flows through me.
In other words, you're talking out of your ass with no understanding of genetics or culture.'
I'm 'racist' not how I explained but how the world views it, for my own reasons. Which, I do not feel I want to express right now, since, that is not the topic of this debate.
You're racist because you treat blacks like animals with no rational basis. You entertain notions that are antiquated and long disproven.
Not true. I've known people to marry their ninth cousins. That is almost no blood relation at all! I wouldn't call that inbreeding. Also, their are so many different families it would never happen and if it did, it would take millions of years to happen.
My first ancestor to arrive to America was on the Mayflower. I have a family history record of that time all the way ti'll my days. The book is about five inches thick. I have seen no inbreeding whatsoever. And yet my family has mananged to maintain German pureblood. Until my father married a Czech woman.
Not just Germans believe in keeping races pure. Many northen European countries do. I believe that EVERY race should keep their race pure so that they don't die out. It will eventually happen.
Yes I did have Natzi relatives I have some of their posessions from the WWII. The Mauser issued in 1943 and uniform. And a 1911 Cult 45 used by my German-American relative in WWI and WWII and in Vietnam.
I had members on both sides, although, both were pure german.
It's almost impossible not to have a personal bias regarding anything. You can't claim that you were raised in an unbiased environment because that's simply not true. I can only assume that your parents had their own opinions and ideals which they initially passed on to you. Regardless on whether or not you held on to those ideas, all one has to do is look at this page to see that your point of view is way off center and biased to the fullest extent.
I hope you feel warm and fuzzy now knowing that you made yourself feel 'politically correct'.
My parents weren't racist or biast against anything. I devolped 'racism' through studying and gaining my own views.
My view is off centered? Gays views are off sentered not mine. There is something extremely wrong with their brains or they weren't raised right. I new a kid that didn't get any fatherly attention in result he became 'homosexual' because he was seeking male attention which he never had.
Those are his own issues. Leave him to deal with them. But a brain scan on homosexuals shows that they're perfectly normal....sort of. The brain of a natural homosexual shows that it is that of the opposite sex. So in short, it's a woman's brain trapped in a male body and vice versa.
You have to destroyed it. Take a black woman having kids with a white man. The kid will either be white or black. That is change.
It isn't the same when two races mix or two cultures. It is not the 'original' pure race or culture.
The race is in the traits. Those traits persist through interbreeding. Do you even know why there are so many races? We evolved different features to suit the different environments. Different races merely reflect our isolation, it doesn't hide that we are all African.
Oh, I get it now. You're self-deluded. Well, I must say that's a disappointment. I thought your type disappeared along with segregation. Apparently not.
The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
There's nothing wrong with interracial marriage. It's just a human marrying another human. Nothing wrong there. It doesn't destroy their race nor does it destroy their culture. Race is just skin color. That's all. Culture is a system of beliefs and practices and people don't give that up easy. You can twist it any way you want. But you're simply lying to yourself.
So that race doesn't get wiped out after multiple inter-racial marriages?
If a white family moves into a black neighborhood and the white family has all daughters that family through generations will become black. This is what I mean. Obviously you don't get it.
Skin color shouldn't matter to begin with. The skin color is simply changing over time. Who cares? Now if you want to learn about wiping out a race, you might want to learn more about Hitler and the Holocaust but I assume you'd support it anyway since you're using the Swastika as your picture.
Oh, I do know more about it. More than you ever would.
I've studied WWI and WWII and the topics of the holocaust for years. Uncovered the propaganda and figured out what was true.
For one Hitler didn't want the Jews or other inferior races to be in Europe his first plans were deportation; doing so got approx. 1 million Jews to Madagascar.
The cost of deportation was to expensive so it resulted in concentration camps places where these undesirables to be held. Not eradicated. Not until later when things got worst.
"Oh, I do know more about it. More than you ever would."
And you can arrogantly make this assumption how?
"I've studied WWI and WWII and the topics of the holocaust for years. Uncovered the propaganda and figured out what was true.
For one Hitler didn't want the Jews or other inferior races to be in Europe his first plans were deportation; doing so got approx. 1 million Jews to Madagascar.
The cost of deportation was to expensive so it resulted in concentration camps places where these undesirables to be held. Not eradicated. Not until later when things got worst."
Pretty common knowledge for History Buffs. Not exactly a secret or a big find.
So that race doesn't get wiped out after multiple inter-racial marriages?
Genetics doesn't work this way. I'm fairly sure I explained this before. A person is a collection of traits. A race is a population with specific unique traits.
When you mate, you shuffle those traits around. It isn't like mixing paints together, it's like shuffling a deck of cards.
The offspring will always be a mix of randomly sorted traits from both parents. The race never dies, because ancestry always stays with you.
If a white family moves into a black neighborhood and the white family has all daughters that family through generations will become black. This is what I mean. Obviously you don't get it.
We were all black once. The environment caused us to have shades of skin between black and white.
Prove it. And the theory of evolution is bullshit. It can't be proven there is no way. Thats why scienctist act like it did happen and enforce their opnion on it.
When you mate, you shuffle those traits around. It isn't like mixing paints together, it's like shuffling a deck of cards.
IT IS like mixing paints together when it is inter-racial. Traits get moved around when you stick to your own race.
"Prove it. And the theory of evolution is bullshit. It can't be proven there is no way. Thats why scienctist act like it did happen and enforce their opnion on it."
Being ignorant of the facts won't prove them wrong. I suggest you do some research. Evolution is a proven fact and has too much documentation and evidence behind it to be otherwise. Human life originated in Africa, so yes, the first humans were black. Don't like it? Get over it. It's a fact.
A theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world; an organized system of accepted knowledge that applies in a variety of circumstances to explain a specific set of phenomena; "theories can incorporate facts and laws and tested hypotheses"; "true in fact and theory"
So you obviously don't even know what a theory is since you didn't even use the word in proper context.
Are you serious right now? Are you even aware of wikipedia's policies? All articles are written in a completely neutral perspective and only display the facts. You're not even allowed to edit the information without citing a liable source. They don't allow any personal perspectives or opinions on their pages. So no, Wikipedia isn't propaganda. Studying the world wars, you should know all about what real propaganda is.
Actually, the arrogance is on your part. You arrogantly believe that if someone doesn't share your views that they're either lying Liberal. That's really pathetic. No offense. Wikipedia displays nothing but the facts. I know this, because I attempted to edit it and they wouldn't accept my edit because it displayed a biased point of view and I didn't cite a source.
Prove it. And the theory of evolution is bullshit. It can't be proven there is no way. Thats why scienctist act like it did happen and enforce their opnion on it.
Only somebody with a twelve-year-old mentality would assume that somebody was gay without any legitimate proof. But hey, that conservative logic for you. Homophobes and Racists. Maybe not all of them, but they definitely seem to possess those undertones.
The minimum length for an argument is 50 characters. The purpose of this restriction is to cut down on the amount of dumb jokes, so we can keep the quality of debate and discourse as high as possible.
Ever heard of the gay gene? Homosexuality occurs in nature. It's a natural population control. So yes, it is human nature. Not all humans, of course, but yes, it is natural.
The gay gene? Don't pull that card. It was proven false, its an excuse they say they have problem and they can't 'help' it because their born that way. Thats bullshit. Some people are born with drug addictions and a natural crave for alcohal. They have AA and NA for this so if being gay is 'because their born that way' why don't they just make something like. Gays Annonymous?
If the gay gene were true, then we should be able to observe this genetic condition scientifically. In other words, if homosexuality has been proven to be a genetic pre-disposition, then biogeneticists should be able to perform a genetic test on people to confirm this condition. But no such medical or genetic tests exist.
If a test did exist to prove a “gay gene,” those who had the gene and had confirmed tests would be on television, in magazines, and on billboards all over the countryside encouraging everyone to get tested.
No proof exists that homosexuality is anything other than a choice and a life-style that one engages in as an act of their will.
Either way, homosexuality still occurs in nature amongst animals, usually as a display of dominance. Gene or no gene, homosexuality doesn't harm anybody in anyway.
Don't give me that bullshit just because I shut your ass up.
Do you actually think animals know what their doing when they do anything that might be 'homosexual' if a human being were to do it to another human being?
"Don't give me that bullshit just because I shut your ass up."
Pull your head out of your ass. You haven't done shit.
"Do you actually think animals know what their doing when they do anything that might be 'homosexual' if a human being were to do it to another human being?"
True, animals don't really know what they're doing. But they don't arrogantly judge either. Humans are smart enough to make a choice and some choose to engage in homosexuality. Are they confused? Maybe. But alot of them are happy with their life choice and quite proud of it, in fact. It isn't in our place to question or judge them. It's called being a decent and rational human being.
Humans are smart enough to make a choice and some choose to engage in homosexuality
You JUST proved my point it is not a natural it is a choice.
Also, you changed the subject to animals engaging in 'homosexual' activity? Why?
reread my post again
Some falsely claim that homosexuality is genetic. If that were true, then we should be able to observe this genetic condition scientifically. In other words, if homosexuality has been proven to be a genetic pre-disposition, then biogeneticists should be able to perform a genetic test on people to confirm this condition. But no such medical or genetic tests exist.
If a test did exist to prove a “gay gene,” those who had the gene and had confirmed tests would be on television, in magazines, and on billboards all over the countryside encouraging everyone to get tested.
No proof exists that homosexuality is anything other than a choice and a life-style that one engages in as an act of their will
No, I know that for alot it's a choice but the possibility exists that it could be natural. I added the tidbit about the animals because if it exists among them, then it's no surprise that it happens among humans. Human beings are animals after all.
The most well-known homosexual animal is the dwarf chimpanzee, one of humanity's closes relatives. The entire species is bisexual. Sex plays an conspicuous role in all their activities and takes the focus away from violence, which is the most typical method of solving conflicts among primates and many other animals.
Humans have been homosexual and bisexual as far back as anyone can remember.
So again, what's the problem? If you don't like gay sex, don't have any. I don't like humiliation sexual play, but you don't see me ranting against it.
Just because we like to do something that you don't like doesn't give you the right to hate us. do you hate everyone who doesn't like something you like or likes something you don't. it's because of stupid fucking ignorant ass wipes like yourself that makes the world the shit hole that it is. get a fucking life and stop worrying bout what gays do in the privacy of their bedrooms you fucking natzi asshole.
If persons such as "enlightened1" are the only ones who are allowed to remain in the other continents, we need only remain in Antarctica for a matter of days, ere they will starve to death for want of somebody intelligent enough to open a can or cook a meal.
I just made some toast, and my carer said it tasted like a rainbow. I would be fine on my own in the world, cos I'm the smartestest, toughestest pimpin' white Hitlayouthgangsta in all of middle class suburbia.
I'm planning to wage a war on everybody but myself and my quiet friend (who only agrees with what I say because he's lonely). I read Mein Kampf while on holiday with my mommy and daddy last year and that guy was onto something.
So, you should all be deported and I would become king of the United States and America.
Precisely the response I anticipated. Mission accomplished.
I just made some toast, and my carer said it tasted like a rainbow.
So you made some soggy toast. Lovely.
I would be fine on my own in the world, cos I'm the smartestest, toughestest pimpin' white Hitlayouthgangsta in all of middle class suburbia.
I'm planning to wage a war on everybody but myself and my quiet friend (who only agrees with what I say because he's lonely). I read Mein Kampf while on holiday with my mommy and daddy last year and that guy was onto something.
So, you should all be deported and I would become king of the United States and America.
Well, good luck with all that. I think I'll have some coffee...
its more like a matter of minutes. When they would try to drive a vehicle to a grocery mart, they would surely crash, run over, and generally kill themselves off very quickly
I wouldn't say so, since you behave in exactly the same way that you just described them as. Not to mention, if we did, you wouldn't have anything to do all day since your hobby seems to be cutting these people down online. (Not that it has any effect, mind you.)
The claim of the Motion itself is merely pure spite towards people who aren't afraid of criticizing arrogant hypocrites who are too busy pretending they have the moral high ground over everyone else in everything they say.
Such people despise the very concept of acknowledging other people's right to their own opinions when they don't agree with them to the extent of resorting to personal attacks.
The title itself proves this: name-calling and a contradiction in the motion's claim itself is a clear agenda of a personal attack towards specific individuals solely based on their opinions.
We are all articulate, dumbass. You know very well what i am referring to....and you have the nerve to call me dishonest when I am unequivocably one of the most honest persons on this site. I probably misspelled a word there...jump on it like a stinging hornet...as if it makes me somehow lesser than you.
Actually not. I can only guess that you think using flowery language is obfuscation
This statement exemplifies why you are an obfuscating *.
So honest that you imitate other people.
Do you really have a stick up your ass? Is it not blatantly obvious that I am having a bit of childish fun? Okay, I'll take the dork's picture off, Daddy.
That would be beneath me.
When the ffffffff has anything been beneath you, Daddy? You act like an asshole 24/7 until someone corners you...then you disappear in an inky blackness, like a frightened squid. You're a phony, plain and simple.
This statement exemplifies why you are an obfuscating
So instead of making an accusation, you simply resort to innuendo.
Do you really have a stick up your ass? Is it not blatantly obvious that I am having a bit of childish fun? Okay, I'll take the dork's picture off, Daddy.
Otherwise known as character assassination.
When the ffffffff has anything been beneath you, Daddy? You act like an asshole 24/7 until someone corners you...then you disappear in an inky blackness, like a frightened squid. You're a phony, plain and simple.
Are your wee feelings hurt?
Maybe my "disappearing" just shows your inability to keep up with me. Of course it would help your case if you gave an example of what you're talking about instead of resorting to the old "you know you're guilty" tactic.
Enlightened1 is hilarious and i believe just looking to have a bit of fun, as for aveskde and company who attempt to argue with him you are playing the game wrong. this is not a serious debate so do not use serious terminology. it is a game of cat and mouse so just have fun.
There you go, obfuscating again...suprising that no one has called you on this yet. You actually admitted to doing this in your conversation with EnigmaticMan. now you are claiming that you don't?
I've seen you do this in every debate you engage in. When someone makes a good point that you can not deal with, you try to obfuscate and confuse the issue...sort of a squid tactic...spraying a cloud of ink when you are cornered with unpleasantries. You are a sneaky little bitch, you may have the rest of them fooled, but not me, bitch.
I've seen you do this in every debate you engage in. When someone makes a good point that you can not deal with, you try to obfuscate and confuse the issue...sort of a squid tactic...spraying a cloud of ink when you are cornered with unpleasantries.
I expect that in your mind dry humour, sarcasm, and high language are all signs of obfuscation. Maybe you also think that breaking a simple question down into its base parts and answering them all with a high degree of detail and admitted uncertainty are all signs of obfuscation. I suppose you aren't familiar with honesty.
You are a sneaky little bitch, you may have the rest of them fooled, but not me, bitch.
I really don't let myself feel anything towards text-based insults. You will have to find some other way to make me feel bad if that is your aim.
There you go, obfuscating again...suprising that no one has called you on this yet. You actually admitted to doing this in your conversation with EnigmaticMan. now you are claiming that you don't?
Oh, now I think I understand what you're talking about. You think that using florid prose is obfuscation.
Jesus Christ learn your proper terms. I hadn't the foggiest clue what you were on about.
It's always nice to have ignorant people around,they tend to give me some entertainment from time to time. Plus,why deport them to Antarctica? All they'll do is find some way to make the environment even worse than it already is,they'll probably pollute the atmosphere and cause global warming to get so bad to where all of the ice in Antarctica will melt within the first 6 months of them being there causing the entire Earth to be flooded and we'll all die.
Your title says Psuedo-Intellectual, yet your description of them would leave one to believe they actually are intellectual... I mean "academic accomplishment" + "above average IQ", that's basically the definition.
Since you think so highly of their intelligence, and are obviously jealous of it, why not instead listen to what they say and try come up with coherent arguments to counter?
It makes no sense.
I usually disagree with Enigmatic actually, but at least he doesn't resort to "Uh, I don't have an argument so you must be gay".
I've offered my neck on several guillotines of debate this fine evening, my lad, care to chop it off? Or do you prefer to engage in personal quibbles between the warped egos here?