CreateDebate


Ama_Deviant's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Ama_Deviant's arguments, looking across every debate.

If only you knew the half of it :p

Oh, it's good on gas too (especially after mexican food).

Haha, I'm still offroading, damn flying spaghetti monster didn't include instructions for this car. All I know is that it looks good, and its stick-shift is huuuge :p

Absolutely! Fate is the schematic set as a grid for our development, but free will is the action enacted along said grid. Consider:

A person is very unhappy with their life, they feel empty. Their profession doesn't match their calling. For example, a lawyer that was meant to be an artist. Fate is the set of variables that prompt an artistic lifestyle and need for expression - they become unhappy and likely endeavor into something artistic when they retire to fill their need. Free will is the action taken through their life (likely guided by societal constraints [need for money, unplanned children, etc...]) irrespective of their "calling".

If you subscribe to astrology, you can think of genetic/energetic makeup as "fate", the road the human vehicle drives on, whether or not they choose to drive off the road is their "free will". :)

2 points

To live, no. To become married, yes. Hope that neatly answers your question :)

Didn't mind some of the games on the 360, but the xbox one is posing some fairly big risks regarding security. Were I to ever consider purchasing a microsoft console, the debate died with the 360 (I own a ps3 and wii u btw).

Third bathroom. I'm sorry to say I find transgender off-putting (I wish them all the best and I would fight for their right to continue their development), but it bugs me out. Give them a third bathroom.

No imperfect human being deserves the power to view a difference of opinion/belief as a mental disorder/illness. Paradigm shifts lead to drastic fundamental world views (yes there are many shifts waiting for us) and people engaging in the above narcissistic viewpoint can only say "ooops, sorry we killed your family brah, my bad hahahah" when said shifts occur.

Of course not! I mean, they should have the option as they have the right to do with their own bodies what they will, but I refuse to sit idly by while a generation of women develop sagging breasts due to their half-baked notions of liberty. Breasts must remain perky!

I disagree with the premise and alternatives presented in this debate since abortion needn't be a moral dilemma. To present it as such forces the notion that it's good or bad as opposed to simply an action.

The next feature will be stubs (in the place of legs). Not all evolution is preferable, and given our penchant for laziness, I stand by my choice :)

2 points

Yes all music should be one way. This is what's given rise to the beautiful and varied art form of music composition that we enjoy today.

Though I get the feeling this topic is a passive-aggressive (through the use of sarcasm) attempt to deride one form of creative expression by virtue of its lackluster composition and delivery. If this is the case, I recommend you google dubstep. Everyone has the right to express themselves, even if they are half-retarded and possess no skill whatsoever in the field they're endeavoring into :)

Aside from the turmoil on the family, isn't abortion expensive compared to, oh you know, the 50 cents for a condom? Using abortion as a birth control measure seems as ridiculous as destroying the planet to eradicate crime.

On a side note, humans were expendable far before abortion. Slaves, sacrifices, work-horses, unics, the list goes on (and many of those acts perpetrated by fundamentalism).

Good, a south park fan :)

A more concrete form...like god? Haha sorry I'm not trying to be difficult, but you set me up for that one.

You're correct, and for many of them, "god" (which I refuse to use as a proper name) was handed to them on a silver platter in their youth, it's much easier to go with the flow.

I completely agree, and as you stated, it seems to be the extremists that enact such policies (in this case, I suggest their religion has little to do with it (more of a means to an end). "Christians" for the most part don't hurt anyone, they refer to a constantly re-written book for life answers and keep their legs closed till marriage - variety is the spice of life, no? And yes some are recruiters, but no more annoying than telemarketers. I say let them have their fun and if they ever challenge their belief system, I will do the best I can to further their journey into the vile pits of freedom (or for the attractive female ones, sexy time free of dogma and condoms :)

Is this any different than a Christian-in-training "crying out for the lord" in church and "feeling something" afterwards? The quality of a trip is largely dependent on mental processes. Think bad thoughts, you're gonna have a bad time etc.. Were you to have engaged in a mental exercise of breathing in green energy and breathing out black energy, you might have experienced the same change in trip.

Oh, and you know, god's will seems to be inexorably tied to the laws of man (it was once ok to kill, and now in our soccer mom-led society, Christians are little more than harmless bible readers).

I think this is proof of the power of our thoughts on our bodies :)

Ok cool....did I suggest I felt otherwise? I don't even know who you are... :p

Absolutely! Rocks are also dangerous, accounting for 75% of all schoolyard crying. And fists!! Don't get me started on what happens when you curl your fingers into those balls of destruction! Let's start a petition to amputate all hands and feet at birth....that'll show em!!

I'm Canadian, time to weigh in :)

Has op ever been to Canada? Or is this based on flame wars from this website?

Canadians are somewhat more helpful and polite than Americans, but similar people occupy both countries.

Just saw some of his responses to people posting on here...He makes a debate flaming a country using the word arrogant, and when they flame back, he feels justified in calling them arrogant. Is that the gist of it? How long has this been going on for? lol Aussies...

Incomplete

argument was primarily against the purported differences between men and women

You're correct, withdrawn :)

gender violence and not sexual abuse.

Sexual abuse is arguably an act of violence. Furthermore, whether or not we agree on the definition of violence, I ventured outside the definition to make an argument (that abuse against weaker by stronger is [and well should continue to be] reviled conscientiously.

absolutely no idea what you are trying to say here

Haha, excuse my overly articulate blathering, I'll try to exercise concision. Men endure a physical training of sorts through development that (I argue) desensitizes a majority of them to physical assault somewhat when compared to women.

degree of punishment is proportionate to the value we place upon a life

True in the case of animal abuse that I feel is unduly ignored based on the value placed on animal life. Untrue in the case of gender abuse given that men and women are already valued at par, simply that women may suffer more from the same violent act than men would.

not find violence against animals...as heinous as violence against a human being...value we view each as having...abused a tiger...more powerful creature...be considered less heinous than if they abused a human being

Exactly the viewpoint I feel requires revision. Exempt animals from physical prowess since an animal locked in a cage is helpless regardless of size. Fe/males are even intellectually (by far the main criteria when considering heinous..ness..ity (^_^), but uneven physically. No...I won't continue with this point given my time constraint and my seeming inability to keep this short, I'll revisit this point at a later time :p

harkening back to...topic which sought a definition of a hate crime...confusion stemming...different debate

Agreed, though it isn't that complicated. I merely critiqued your disputing my initial claim that change is required with the statement "what should be considered was the actual motive and harm inflicted". Are you saying you commented on my point "we need change" with "well the textbook definition is..."?

misunderstood my point..woman does she would harm her victim any less

Haha no I feel you misunderstood my point. I wasn't commenting on the possible damage, but the character of the individual (one that would abuse a helpless victim). It's a special kind of cowardice (yes I agree a personal value) that I feel transcends "matter of fact" abuse.

I apologize for posting an incomplete rebuttal, I admit that I have inescapable priorities that take precedent such as school. I find with exchanges such as this (entertaining I assure you) that the arguments often grow exponentially as disputes to sentences become paragraphs and so on.

This incomplete dispute was sitting on my desktop for close to a week so I thought I'd post it. It seems to me right now that this debate will never completely conclude but I must say I've enjoyed arguing with you. Well done :)

Ama_Deviant(248) Clarified
1 point

Example(s)? I ask since I find some of the most "blatant" truths to be murky at best.

I'm personally interested in only women, so I don't need to see anything but women. Plus if the girl's hot I hate on the guy because I'm not the one doing it....solo women it is!

In the lead now!! Wahahah........................arghem........

Truth would be objective, I assume our access to said truth is failing though.

In all seriousness tho, if every North American woman was raped and impregnated....I wonder how much the pro-life suppot would change....any volunteers men? (It's for science...so it's ok right? [I mean, science = lots of travesties being acceptable]).

I get a lot of mileage on women eventually needing abortions... :p


1 of 12 Pages: Next >>

Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]