- 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
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
If a man rapes someone they're not going to be let off because they're transgender. That's the most idiotic thing I've heard all day.
If you're worried about people's safety, try this one: a biological man who is a transgender woman is not allowed into the female toilet. She goes into the male toilet. She gets brutally beaten and probably raped herself for being a "freak".
You can't claim "oh, I'm looking out for people's safety!" when you're ignoring one of the fundamental reasons why people need these bathrooms.
Why shouldn't they? The constitution separates religion and the state, not marriage and the state.
Marriage has nothing to do with religion. Religion didn't create marriage. Marriage was created by the government, so why shouldn't they be allowed to say who gets married?
One of the government's priorities is equality for all citizens. Disallowing certain citizens from being married is restricting equality, plain and simple. It's a breach of human rights.
If his plan is to let his country's healthcare system implode without establishing a backup then he's a moron and not fit to be president.
Letting Obamacare collapse without coming up with a suitable replacement will fuck over the entire country, not just the democrats.
It could definitely be argued that it actually emphasises your free will.
People are deterred from making certain decisions due to the rules of society, but when they do decide to do something, it's a lot more significant and is even further proof of free will existing.
Free will does exist. I could go outside right now and punch someone, but I'm not going to, because I have free will. The fact that I can actually imagine a scenario in which I could go outside and punch someone is proof of free will.
A more interesting argument would be "does society allow us free will?"
The reason I'm not going to go round murdering people is because I don't want to go to jail.
Another reason is because I believe murder is wrong... but, again, why do we believe this?
We believe it because society has conditioned us to see murder as wrong. I challenge you to explain to me why murder is objectively wrong.
"Because it's taking someone's life!"
Why is that bad?
"Because life is precious!"
I'm going off on a bit of a tangent here. The point is, free will does exist - however, it is restricted by our own society.
Think of it this way: either God exists, or he doesn't.
If God exists, then we have free will because He gave it to us.
If God doesn't exist, then we have free will because there is no God to restrict our free will.
We have evolved over millions of years to become intelligent creatures which can think independently. If God began the evolutionary process then He likely did so with the intention of us developing autonomy.
If God did not begin the evolutionary process, and does not exist, then nothing changes. We still have free will which has resulted from years of evolution.
God is an irrelevant concept when talking about free will; whether he exists or not, we still have free will. Nothing changes.