CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Malousherry2

Reward Points:3
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
100%
Arguments:3
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
3 most recent arguments.
2 points

The worse that could happen? Well, according to LGBTQ rights groups, homosexuality is a "natural" thing. Although no study backs up any major "difference" in the brain of a homosexual person in comparison to, say, a heterosexual, homosexuals do tend to have a deep hormonal imbalance. Now, that in itself proves that Mother Nature went "wrong" somewhere. Not criticizing- all of us are born different. However, if you decide to defend the LGBTQ community view of homosexuality- it's natural, it cannot be helped, etc., you're going down a very slippery slope.

If someone is born a homosexual, if it cannot be helped, then neither can other sexually deviant preferences. Next step up is that pedophiles or zoophiles cannot control their own preferences. After all, it runs on the same logic- the only difference is that Western society views homosexuality as acceptable and pedophilia as (very rightly so) unacceptable. A contrario, other societies in the world think the contrary- in many countries of the Middle East, homosexuality is a crime punishable in many ways including death, but marriage to "child brides" where the marriage may be consummated as soon as the girl hits menstruation (which in some cases can be as young as 9) is deemed perfectly acceptable and, in fact, child brides are intensely sought after in all layers of society.

So what would be the next step, according to the LGBTQ lobby views? Pedophilia? Zoophilia? Necrophilia? All imaginable kinds of -philia that according to them "cannot be helped"? And if you think I'm exaggerating, several hard-left news outlets are already condoning pedophilia such as Salon, who interviewed and set up a tearful defense of this disgusting man: https://notamonsterblog.wordpress.com/

Secondly, about transgenderism, once again, transgenders suffer from hormonal imbalance; this time the sufferers lack testosterone (men) or estrogen (women) and as such, do not develop according to their birth sex; add to that the environment, that glorifies transgenderism through lobby pressure on society, and the sufferer is all the more likely to change sex. These people do not need to go under the knife; they have convinced themselves that they're living a falsehood by being born with the wrong genital area, when an early diagnosis and intake of hormones could easily correct the imbalance. The worse that could happen here is of course the absolute tragedy that a transgender could realize that he or she or it made the wrong decision, influenced by lobbies and ads, and has made an irreversible mistake; another fatality is of when this issue is forced upon children, as for example in this case: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3863880/Christian-parents-girl-14-wants-change-gender-forced-legal-action-against-local-council-backs-efforts-against-wishes.html

Or here: https://4thwavenow.com/2015/12/04/parents-keep-listening-to-your-gut-not-the-gender-therapist/

Or here: http://thefederalist.com/2016/10/11/transgender-mans-child-hurt-will-hurt-kids/

It goes on and on and on, really. The question is where to draw the line; if you open a box where ten mice are trapped and let one out, the others are going to want to follow. Before all the lobbying nonsense, kids were raised by mother and father and, despite what the LGBTQ community would have people these days believe, people were fine. People did not "live in another's body". People did not have thirty-three genders each. People were fine leading their lives the natural way. And guess what? They. Were. Fine. The question often arises here in Europe, why do so many people now convert to Islam, some of whom join ISIS? Look at the radically opposite values of the two groups. While Anglican churches are busy wondering if transgenders can become priests, Islam has remained true to its original values- family, warfare, etc. I'm no admirer of Islam myself but I can understand the appeal- between a society where wo-men, catkin, non binary, recycled hedgehog bladders, reincarnated soup bowls, morphing weirdosexuals are a strong enough lobby to obtain that full grown men in skirts can use bathrooms alongside with little girls, and a society where mother/father/kids are the only acceptable family unit as has been the case since as far as humanity can remember, it's not a surprise.

1 point

At no point have I ever heard a Christian say that Jesus was God. Jesus was the SON of God, created within Mary's womb. Throwing around an argument saying "this proves (Jesus) wasn't God" is ridiculous; no-one said he was, not himself nor his followers. He was son of God and a prophet, but that's it.

2 points

Yes, they absolutely should. "Hitting" a child on occasion cannot be compared to actively beating a child. Look at mother animals in the wild. Lionesses, for example, will pinch the scruff of their cub's neck with their teeth if the cub misbehaves. Apes, closer to us, will also pinch or slap their young to correct a behavior. Why? Because sometimes, without realizing it, youngsters- of any species- put themselves in dangerous situations without realizing the potential danger of said situations. A simple word of advice is not always sufficient to explain to the child, especially a very young one, the danger of their behavior and may repeat it in the future, curious about WHY they weren't allowed to do so in the first place. However, if the child associates that behavior with a small amount of pain, they will be less likely to repeat- they will associate the behavior with pain and thus, danger. If, for example, a two-year-old reaches out to touch a hot pan despite his mother's warning, a smack on the bottom can teach that child to associate touching the hot pan with pain and thus danger, without going through the actual process of burning himself to learn so. If, when he reaches for the pan, his mother merely stands around, or simply says no, the trust the child will feel towards his mother will be reduced- because she couldn't, or wouldn't, protect him from the actual danger. If she grabs him away from the pan and scolds him, he will be curious as to why, and does not understand the notion of danger, children needing to touch to discover the world.

Malousherry2 has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here