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.

Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!

Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

View All

View All

View All

RSS SoapyTurtle

Reward Points:22
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.
Efficiency Monitor

10 most recent arguments.
1 point

Honest question here. If we take away greed, do you think GMOs are a bad idea?Hypothetically, if a GMO is safe, do you think they are a bad idea? I recently watched a short clip (sorry I cannot reference it because I don't remember where it came from, it's 4AM here!) that showed a strand of rice that is not as susceptible to drowning do to a flooded plain. This rice would live even after being submerged for up to three weeks. I have heard people argue that this is bad but I don't get why! Thanks in advance.

1 point


I have not been on this site for a very long time but I decided to hop back on here this morning. I read multiple debates and a few of my opinions had changed. I would like to say that I see where you are coming from now. Although I do not completely agree, I agree that, in order for there to be a crime, there must be a victim - that's not why I am replying though. I am replying because the one thing that caught my attention was your style of I decided to read more of your posts. Your inability to attempt to mock every person you debate with baffles me. I don't see how you can expect someone to take your point of view seriously with the way you speak to people on here. You come off like a complete punk who gets his jollies from telling people off rather than debating. What is the point of debating with someone who clearly walks into a room thinking he is the smartest person in there while everyone else is a pawn. Get a clue!

1 point

Working with the presumption that any law that allows someone to be imprisoned for using or selling drugs is inherently unjust.

Well you can't work with the presumption that any law that allows someone to be imprisoned for using or selling drugs is inherently unjust. How could you? Also, I graduated with a Criminal Justice degree, I know the statistics. Throwing all those numbers on here proves nothing. There are tons of people in the correctional facilities. We know this. I am interested to hear how these people imprisoned for drug charges were put there by unjust laws. A sob story about how it is not their fault they touched drugs is in no way warrant for calling the law unjust. So for now, that 0.01% figure I pulled out of my ass still looks great as you have not given me one example of an inmate in prison due to unjust laws. Unless you believe what you said earlier in that all drug charges are unjust. Luckily, no one I know, especially in the field of corrections, believe this.

1 point

Not when he is clearly making false accusations of the person he is rebutting.

1 point

I think you are a bit confused. Kari never said murder and rape aren't severe crimes. Also he/she believes they should not be allowed to vote. You sided with yes they should have the right to vote. I think you meant to say they shouldn't.

1 point

You stated that a reason people in prison should be allowed to vote is that there are prisoners who have been put there unjustifiably. That being said I would expect this unjust law to be pretty prevalent because saying all prisoners should be able to vote due to the 0.01% who are imprisoned under unjust laws is a little far fetched.

1 point

First off. I am sorry that this website is all you have going for you, but I'm sure treating people like crap on here really helps you get through the day.

Your response to me stating I am here to learn is this.

I can't help willful ignorance.

I was clearly saying I did not quite understand and was looking for a clarification you prick. Yes he did speak of trifle-down economics but in a more general scope he was talking about how a free market doesn't work. Oh and by the way, are you saying that the quote was not 0 accurate? If not, how in the world is that crap from a bad source.

I am sure you are a very intelligent person and I am sure you are so much more educated on this issue than I, but in the scope of things, you seem pretty miserable so I am fine with where I'm at in life!

Can anyone please explain what other jobs have been created by Obama because as I was saying earlier I cannot see GM being the only factor. Also, I don't mean to be willfully ignorant. I may be ignorant on this subject but that's why I'm here, to learn.

1 point

I can offer up some statistics, it would take me a couple of hops and a Google search, but I want to keep my effort commensurate with that of my opponent. So if you give an answer to the following two questions, I'll recognize that as proof of your willingness to reason and take you seriously.

So your answer is no? You can't give us any examples of unjust laws. Ones that are actually worth mentioning. You are the one making the claim, therefore the burden of proof lies on you my friend.

Also, before you give us some example of an unjust law that put 3 people in prison, please remember that you are arguing that this is a sufficient reason to allow prisoners to vote!

2 points

Why is this argument so based on what a republican did 8 years ago or what a democrat did 12 years ago. Yes, we can look which party is to blame for which problem but it doesn't help much when looking forward. You can't simply state that whoever was in office at the time an issue arose that it was their fault. Things take time to pan out.

1 point

I agree with those statistics but I don't think we can attribute all of this growth to Obama. I will admit I was quick to say a failing car company is going to fail whether or not we spend billions on them. I was proved wrong. It worked. Obama is clearly against a free market. In my opinion he has great ideas but they are too far fetched. Although he wants to, we can't help everyone! Here is Obama's view Tuesday, President Barack Obama argued that while a limited government that preserves free markets "speaks to our rugged individualism" as Americans, such a system "doesn't work" and "has never worked" and that Americans must look to a more activist government that taxes more, spends more and regulates more if they want to preserve the middle class.

Also, and this is not an attack on Obama's stimulus package ( I am here to learn), what jobs did Obama create that wouldn't have been created on their own. I've heard people say governmental jobs, but how many street sweepers can you really hire. I've also heard GM created tons of jobs, but I can't see that being too true.

SoapyTurtle has not yet created any debates.

About Me

Biographical Information
Gender: Male
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Republican
Country: United States

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