Twitter addict?
Follow us
and be the first to find out when debates become popular!
All Debates
You are browsing through all debates. You can refine the results by using the drop-down boxes above. You can view more information about each debate by clicking Show Details at right.
THE CASEYou are the mayor of Skokie, Ill., a community with a large Jewish population, including thousands of Holocaust survivors. Members of a political party with a history of divisive and discriminatory views want to stage a march in your town. In past public gatherings, the members of this party have worn uniforms that resemble the robes worn by the Ku Klux Klan (a hate group that promotes white supremacy) and armbands with swastikas, a symbol of the Nazi Party. The Nazi Party, led by Adolf Hitler, was responsible for the death of millions of Jews and members of other minority groups in the World War II Holocaust.Although the party has said this march is about protesting new rules limiting political demonstrations in public parks, many members of your community suspect that it will also be used as an opportunity to promote the group’s anti-Semitic and anti-integration views and to intimidate local residents. The marchers argue that because they have given fair warning of when and where the march will take place (in addition to public announcements, they have advertised the planned gathering in the local newspaper) residents who are fearful can avoid the protest.Community members are rallying together to try to stop this demonstration, which many see as similar to Nazi demonstrations against Jews during World War II because of the views being expressed and the display of swastikas. A local circuit court has ruled that the march cannot take place because of the real and significant potential that it will turn violent. But the party is appealing the ruling, and your community is looking to you for guidance on what to do next.Should you allow this protest to proceed?
THE CASEYou are a major funder of a nonprofit aimed at improving young people’s mental health. You believe strongly that online harassment and demeaning messages — often known as cyberbullying — are a serious problem among teens.You have assembled an advisory team to explore the many ways your funding could support anti-cyberbullying initiatives. Your team is composed of educators, mental health experts, media professionals and lawyers.The educators and mental health professionals think your organization should push for a nationwide law that would make cyberbullying a crime. They argue that teenagers are especially susceptible to mental health issues such as depression and even suicide, and that cyberbullying won’t be taken seriously until there is a federal law against it. They say that protecting the mental health of the country’s youth should be your first priority and that the First Amendment should not be used to protect speech intended to harm others.The media professionals and lawyers, however, think your money should be spent to teach teens positive online habits and how to remain resilient in the face of abusive online content. They argue that supporting a law to criminalize cyberbullying is a waste of money because the Supreme Court would eventually strike it down as a violation of the First Amendment. The lawyers cite cases where state supreme courts have overturned state laws against cyberbullying for this reason. The media professionals are also concerned about setting precedents that could have a chilling effect on all free speech.After hearing both arguments, you must decide the best way to spend your time and money.Should you back a nationwide law against cyberbullying?
Authority is just a concept created by humans to control humans, what make the king (or whoever is in power) above the rest of us? Devine right to rule is a sham! Convince me ANY form of authority is legitimate in any way!
Amazon Prime Yanks Clarence Thomas Documentary During Black History Monthhttps://humanevents.com/2021/02/26/amazon-prime-yanks-clarence-thomas-documentary-during-black-history-month/
Should the First Amendment — which protects the freedom of speech, assembly and petition —protect this protest? Why or why not?What types of rules or restrictions could be put in place to allow the march to take place but limit the potential for harm or violence? How would you control the activities allowed, location, timing, symbols and messages displayed, etc.?Do you think citizens should have a right to prevent fearful imagery or hateful language from being brought into their own communities?Whose responsibility is it to prevent violence during a political demonstration? The organizers? Participants? Those who show up to counterprotest? City leaders? Police?Is providing a public announcement a reasonable way to make sure that people who disagree with a protest’s topic stay away and avoid conflict? Should people who disagree with the ideas being presented at a demonstration be able to confront the demonstrators?In today’s social and political climate, are there any views or symbols that should be deemed too controversial for public protests?
THE CASEYou are the mayor of Skokie, Ill., a community with a large Jewish population, including thousands of Holocaust survivors. Members of a political party with a history of divisive and discriminatory views want to stage a march in your town. In past public gatherings, the members of this party have worn uniforms that resemble the robes worn by the Ku Klux Klan (a hate group that promotes white supremacy) and armbands with swastikas, a symbol of the Nazi Party. The Nazi Party, led by Adolf Hitler, was responsible for the death of millions of Jews and members of other minority groups in the World War II Holocaust.Although the party has said this march is about protesting new rules limiting political demonstrations in public parks, many members of your community suspect that it will also be used as an opportunity to promote the group’s anti-Semitic and anti-integration views and to intimidate local residents. The marchers argue that because they have given fair warning of when and where the march will take place (in addition to public announcements, they have advertised the planned gathering in the local newspaper) residents who are fearful can avoid the protest. Community members are rallying together to try to stop this demonstration, which many see as similar to Nazi demonstrations against Jews during World War II because of the views being expressed and the display of swastikas. A local circuit court has ruled that the march cannot take place because of the real and significant potential that it will turn violent. But the party is appealing the ruling, and your community is looking to you for guidance on what to do next. Should you allow this protest to proceed?
THE CASEYou work for a nonprofit organization that advocates for greater racial equality in the United States. Recently, there have been a number of shootings in which police officers have killed unarmed black men. Your organization is looking for a way to publicize this issue and help create a movement for change to ensure that all Americans can live in safety and without fear.You become aware of a protest started by a biracial quarterback with the National Football League. In order to bring attention to the issue of police shootings, this athlete has started to kneel rather than stand when the national anthem plays before a game. Some teammates and players on other teams have periodically chosen to join him in this gesture. In interviews, the player has confirmed that he is hoping to use his high-profile position to call attention to racial injustice in America.The athlete’s protest has been met with both support and anger. Supporters see the kneeling as a peaceful and respectful way to remind the public that racism continues to impact many Americans, sometimes with fatal consequences. Critics say that kneeling during the anthem shows disrespect toward our nation and service members who have made many sacrifices — sometimes even giving their lives — to keep our nation safe and prosperous.You believe this protest could be an opportunity to encourage a bigger conversation about inequality in America. You are deciding whether to begin a campaign on social media about the protests to drum up support for your organization and the changes it seeks to make. You could post photos and messages tracking the latest protests, public responses and the athlete’s comments on his actions, and possibly tap into some athletes’ large social media followings.Taking the conversation online might give the protest more reach and start a conversation protected by the First Amendment. (As a private company, the NFL has the power to stop players’ protests at any time.) But posting about the protests could also elicit some angry reactions and draw out trolls who may use their First Amendment freedom of speech to attack your cause.Should you try to expand the impact of this protest using social media?
THE CASEYou are the mayor of Charlottesville, Va. Months earlier a far-right activist organized a rally in your city that turned violent. Your city was targeted in part because it had recently renamed a public park that used to honor a Confederate Civil War general. The park is now called Emancipation Park, and the city has also announced plans to remove a statue of Gen. Robert E. Lee from the park. Many of the individuals and groups drawn to the rally were neo-Nazi and white nationalists. White nationalists advocate for the supremacy of white races over other races.Your city made some efforts to limit the impact of the rally, including a last-minute attempt to relocate it to a larger park to accommodate more people and move it away from the high-traffic downtown area, but a judge ruled that this move violated the protesters’ First Amendment rights to speech and assembly.On the day of the rally, as the crowds of protesters and counterprotesters grew, they spilled out of the park and into the downtown streets. Protesters from white nationalist groups, counterprotesters and some bystanders were injured when participants began hitting each other with sticks and spraying chemical irritants. A counterprotester was killed and many more injured when a self-proclaimed white nationalist drove his car into a crowd.Now the same group wants to return to your city to hold a one-year anniversary rally. Your city manager denied its application for a permit, citing the city’s lack of resources to keep all citizens safe regardless of their views. But the organizer of the rally is now suing your city for the right to hold his Unite the Right rally there, claiming you are discriminating against the content of his speech, which would violate the First Amendment. He argues that violence erupted at the original protest because of poor planning by city officials and because law enforcement failed to keep counterprotesters away from the rally participants.Should you change course and grant the permit for an anniversary rally?
Those two little love Nazis would make a great power couple. Six gun Amarel could be the best man.Then Nom could gatecrash the reception and eat all the fried chicken.I think this needs to happen. Bronto is lonely since his wife left his ass and took the kids, and Dana is always looking for new rape victims.Say I all those in favour.
Massey
Ferguson - an incredibly famous premium brand offering a wide assortment of
work vehicles and homestead hardware is a symbol in the realm of farm trucks
since the previous century. Perceived for its legacy, imaginative highlights,
and predominant form quality, this famous worldwide farm vehicle brand offers
perhaps the most extensive and flexible scopes of agrarian and utility work
vehicles in the business.Source: https://tractorguru.in/massey-ferguson-tractors
quarter of the people Colorado said died from coronavirus don’t have COVID-19 on their death certificatehttps://coloradosun.com/2020/05/15/colorado-coronavirus-death-certificate/
Increasingly, an individual’s chances in life are determined by their starting point (socio-economic status at birth, where they were born, etc.), resulting in economies and societies that too often reproduce rather than reduce historic inequalities. Across most socio-economic systems today—a person’s background often predetermines the level of education they will attain, the type of work they will do and the level of income they will earn. This “lock-in” from birth has consequences for growth, cohesion and innovation across societies. Across economies, children born in less affluent families tend to experience greater barriers to success than those born in more affluent families. These inequalities of opportunity may become entrenched and foster long-term economic inequalities as well as deep economic and social cleavages. Figure 2 illustrates the relationship between a leading measure of economic inequality (the Gini coefficient) and the degree to which one’s parents’ income predicts one’s own income (i.e. intergenerational income elasticity). This graphic, also known as “The Great Gatsby Curve”, reveals a strong linear relationship in which countries with high levels of relative social mobility—such as Finland, Norway or Denmark—also exhibit lower levels of income inequality. Conversely, countries with low relative social mobility—such as China or Brazil—also exhibit high levels of economic inequality. As highlighted by thinkers such as John Rawls and Amartya Sen, in an ideal world, individuals would have the capabilities to prosper, irrespective of their background or personal characteristics.https://reports.weforum.org/social-mobility-report-2020/introduction/Fascinating article.
↓ Show Details
