- 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 those persons were Russian and you looked the other way as they set up their hateful messages targeted at Democratic leaders, perhaps you even worked alongside them, we would call you a Treason, and we would be fully within our right to torture you to death, by American Law.
It might be a good idea in the future to find out what kind of people your having dealing with.
The opposition has come up with the exact idea which is a microcosm for real life discourse that is happening in countries all over the world.
The idea is to have one debate where little kids can go, and someone is always watching to ensure which ideas and words are expressed. And a separate debate in which all words and expressions were allowed to be free and unguided, which I would sensibly call the adult version. I agree this should be so. The question then becomes which site do YOU as a generic user want this site to be. One which limits words and beliefs to protect certain entities, or one that allows unlimited use of the English language and its expletives. ‘ Free speech ‘. Or. ‘ Directed speech ‘
It’s as simple as that I’m my mind. Are you free, or are you free to believe whatever he says is ok to believe?
A place where children could have their ideas like Santa clause and the tooth fairy reinforced for one debate, and for the other adults can have unguided free discussions, with no artificial interventions from SJWs and religious zealots and the like. I agree, one for little kids one for adults.
Your first mistake is the assertion that bullying on a debate site actually exists. Are any persons on this sites nervous’ systems tied directly in to the hardware of their computers? Do my harsh words and scary ideas do anything to stop you from refuting them in any way? If someone suggests you commit suicide, should you take anything they say seriously? These are all questions grown adults have to ask everyday they go through life in a society.
The problem with word police as I’ve already elucidated, is that not everyone’s language has been guided by the same authorities, so they may never use the same exact words as each other, but this alone does not invalidate the views of that person or group. People can’t be wrong simply from the viewpoint of profanity, although they may be completely wrong socially or morally in using some words. This infraction of social morality does nothing still to invalidate their point of view or opinions.
Your sarcasm is noted, but it might also be noted that whilst irritating to read, your post is not that unlike most retorts of young adults in the throes of a hissy fit. As an adult its my duty to point out the fit and then repudiate all the incoherent babbling contained within it. That’s how adults debate in real life.
In Real life, arguments are based on the best argument. The best argument just might happen to be a staunch personal attack. I don’t see anything wrong with personal attacks because they either will or will not be dismissed naturally because they do or do not have relevance in the debate.
In Real life people use the words they are familiar with. Just because someone’s background may not incline them to use the exact same words you use, using them doesn’t lessen the strength of said argument whatsoever in my opinion. They may judge YOUR language as incredibly biased and judgemental, and may disregard your genuine insight based on the fact that it was arrogant and sycophantic.
I suppose it could be said I am in favor of Dawinian Debating, the best argument will win because it has the most strength and merit based on available evidence, regardless of how any observer feels about the concept or the language used to convey said concepts.
Are you gonna tell your mommy on me? Are my words not good enough to hang around with your words? Ahhhhh!?!? You can believe me cause I’m telling you, that every single word I say, I mean and it’s my choice to use those words and I soooooo don’t give a flying money sphincter what you think that means. And if offends you, who cares? Who are you? Why would we care what you think is civilized? What have you done for society that gives you the opinion you should have a say?
You not so smarty smarty hey there Japan. You clearly are unable to interpolate the necessary data to understand that...... oh never mind. Pointless. I’m not the one suggesting such a policy exist, but YOU cannot deny that such a policy already exists and it is in action.
Sorry Andy, I really didn’t know there was going to be this much aversion to non-free speech. Understandably, people can’t just run their mouths constantly spewing racist or hateful epithets. Clearly something should be done about horribly ignorant opinions and beliefs.
The problem as I see it is that horrible bigots can just clean up their language and they are good to go. They conceal their disgusting arguments in clean swearless paragraphs, which people read and may take stock in. And then what have you done to stop ignorant bullies, nothing. You’ve just made sure that they understand spreading their hate is ok, as long as they don’t use naughty words.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!