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
pic


Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS TheBatman

Reward Points:47
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.
95%
Arguments:28
Debates:5
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
2 points

SWEARING IS EVIL!! SUPREMEPIZZA SHOULD BE PUT TO DEATH!! KILL ALL CURSE WORDS!!!

1 point

"Modern art" is too broad a term. I have a friend who says that "All modern music is shit" and when I ask him to define what modern music is he usually presents examples like Lil' Wayne and Nicki Minaj. This is not modern music, this is mainstream music. Perhaps the real question should be "Is MAINSTREAM art real art?" The definition of art is anything that was created using creative skill and imagination. So when looking at art, modern, mainstream or otherwise, you should ask "Does this present traits of creative skill and imagination?" and if it doesn't then no it is not art.

1 point

Yes, it is hypocritical. Even though the situations are slightly different, one person killing an innocent person and the Government sentencing a guilty person to death. It is often said that no one has the right to choose whether someone lives or dies. When someone is sentenced to death and killed it contradicts the idea that nobody has the right to decide whether or not to kill another human. It is hypocritical because the laws you can't kill someone but then says that you will sentenced to death if you do. Also, in a lot of ways, being sentenced to life in prison is a lot worse than dying. People always say "I don't want to die" but really, who cares? Once you're dead, you're dead and that's it. You never have to deal with the guilt of what you did. You just die. I don't want to turn this into a religious debate but the only reason someone would be afraid of dying is if there is something awful (Hell or an equivalent) waiting for them on the other side.

1 point

Satanism is a religion by the very definition of what a religion is. It may contain philosophical views and beliefs but they are part of the religion that is Satanism.

1 point

It is a religion by the definition of what religion is. While it may contain philosophical writings and beliefs they are part of the religion that is LaVeyan Satanism. It is defined as a religion and to deny the fact that it is one is just ridiculous.

1 point

Yes. As plainly as I can put it, yes. When someone is being beaten in an alley do they not have the right to exercise self-defence, which in some case includes taking the life of their attacker? Everyone seems to keep stating that if the violence is recurring than the woman should have left the house. I disagree with this for two reasons. One: Domestic abuse victims are not always women. The same as not all rape victims are women. Two: Sometimes these victims have literally no where else to go but onto the streets and if I where them I would take abuse over subjecting myself to the voilent dangers of the streets. Both those scenarios are awful and I don't believe anyone should be subject to them but the abuse is the lesser of two evils until the victim has somewhere to go. But don't let my previous statements mislead you, I do believe in alternatives to deadly force such as shelters for victims of abuse of the police but when someone is backed into a corner and fearing for their life because the person opposite them is beating them then I believe it is morally right for them to use deadly force to save themselves.

1 point

So would that mean that everyone who lives for themselves can and should be called a LaVeyan Satanist? What if someone doesn't feel the need or want to identify with a certain religion but still wants to live for themselves, should they be called Satanists? The answer to both those questions is no. Living for yourself is freedom, LaVeyan Satanism is rules and guidelines masquerading as freedom.

1 point

Well Satanism has rules correct? Rules that should be followed if you follow the religion. You may say that you can pick and choose what you want to live by but then why even be part of the religion at all if you don't agree with all of it.

1 point

It think it's wrong to assume that in order to be a revolutionary thinker you have to be crazy even at all, not that being crazy is necessarily a bad thing but I don't believe it's always a factor when it comes to the mind of being a revolutionary.

2 points

I do support what've said but I'm using "Lunatic" as just a quick summary of people thinking his ideas were ridiculous without having to say all of it, I'm sorry if it came across differently than I had originally intended

Displaying 5 most recent debates.

Winning Position: Boats
Winning Position: Genius
Winning Position: No, It isn't ironic

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