- 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.
I know. Christ wasn't born in December. But that doesn't mean Christmas isn't about Christ. Whatever it used to be was changed. The birth of Christ was celebrated before that happened.
I don't see what point you're trying to make as if that makes celebrating Christ less valid.
Ohh ok I see where you're coming from I do. It was like the celebration of the winter tree or something like that?? I don't know but Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Christ.
It's like when a company gets bought by another company. It's like the catholic church absorbed that holiday and some parts of it like the tree but it's core meaning is this Christ.
Christmas for you isn't Christmas then.
Christmas is the celebration of the birth of Jesus Christ. You can go through the motions of commercialism.(I'm assuming that's what you're talking about) Which I think is just a perk, don't get me wrong I love lights and trees.
Depends on your definition of Christmas. Just because you put up lights and buy a tree doesn't mean you're celebrating Christmas.
Remember Christmas is a religious holiday, a Christian holiday. That's a fact. Weather you're liberal, atheist, whatever you can't touch that. (:
So if you're an atheist you can join in some of the festivities associated with Christmas. But you're in no means celebrating (let alone "getting into the spirit" of) Christmas.
Don't get me wrong I'm not trying to exclude anyone. Every bodies welcome to whatever part of Christmas they wan't. All are welcome to celebrate Christmas but not everyone does.
"Are you suggesting that I am trying to shut out these conspiracy theories if I am against it and beyond it?"
It depends on why you're against and beyond it. If you refuse to talk about it or look at any evidence (or don't care about the severe lack of investigation) then I would say yes. But I'm not making assumptions.
Here's a little bit of evidence.
"How would anyone know that an conspiracy exists?" We're talking about conspiracy THEORIES. So they technically don't know if that's what you're getting at.
"Are you suggesting I am trying to snuff out the conspiracy due to I maybe withholding a secret? That is the only logical explanation."
You lost me there.
"How can there be an conspiracy when people are creating them out of thin air? NOT POSSIBLE. They are creating their own reality."
Creating "conspiracy theories" you mean? I realize we're taking the word theory lightly. I just don't know what else to call it.
If it makes you feel any better I don't generally agree with most "conspiracy theorists".
All I am saying is that we should all look at evidence weather it be for or against these ideas.
"What should have been argued was that the secret would spread like wild fire, not the conspiracy because if there are no secrets, then a conspiracy is irrelevant,"
Ok ..and If there are no secrets, then a secret is irrelevant..
But either way my point is that the conspiracy(or whatever you want to call it) is safe because there's always conspiracy theories and people always scoff at them. The majority wont listen.
About CreateDebateThe CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Sharing ToolsInvite Your Friends
RSS & XML Feeds
Basic StuffUser Agreement