- 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
I speak Spanish and English, aiming to learn more languages in the future. I don't really have any preferred language because i think they're all precious for their own reasons. They're all interconnected in some way and always stem back to another more ancient language which i think is fascinating in itself. What about you?
I don't think that killing people as a form of punishment is setting a very good example to the rest of the world - if the public start to see authorities giving people death penalties, everybody will just think that killing is ok and it will be a vicious circle! The best way to get through to people, i think, about what they've done wrong in society is by teaching/encouraging/inspiring them, not killing.
Of course we wouldn't ! The whole point of being an atheist is that we DON'T think religion solves things like world peace. I'm an atheist because i don't see how, logically and realistically, there could be an almighty being up there controlling everything going on, and for the good ? Whatever... if God does exist then he's clearly failed to bring us peace right from the start. I mean we wouldn't have had two world wars already if he was so caring about the human race and so powerful.
sorry, this mainly just made me chuckle
But yes, i generally think that both books are awesome in their own right, of course. BUT, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out that lord of the rings is written in a MUCH more complex, detailed and professional style than Harry Potter. I mean come on, the target audience for harry potter is young people - kids even. Of course its going to be on a slightly lower level because they need to understand it. The reason most children aren't into lord of the rings is because they literally don't understand the content of the book - they can't engage with it - in other words, it's BETTER and written on a higher intellectual level. Thereeee we go. I rest my case.
Most people i've spoken to who lost their virginity at an age which was much lower than the standard age of consent, have said that they don't feel any regret about it because at the TIME it felt right to them. Take me for example - i lost mine at the age of 14 which sounds quite young, but actually, when you look at the REAL rate at which teenagers are having sex and getting pregnant in this country, it's not abnormal at all to have sex when you're 14. Even 12/13 nowadays, i wouldn't put it past 'em. And the point is, girls and boys will naturally want to have sex as soon as they hit puberty, because it's natural to want to mate and make the human race continue as soon as you are physically able to, no matter how much society tries to get in the way of that. So i think the age of consent in today's society should be about 14 - because that is the average age at which girls and boys hit their peak of puberty. As my dad always said - if you try to push nature down, it'll always fight back at you !
I agree with terminator. I'm gay, and the fact that people use the word 'gay' in a derogatory sense doesn't bother me in the SLIGHTEST. Nor should it bother anybody else, because they should just accept that the english language is a very complex field, and the meaning of words are constantly changing and developing new connotations. I agree that this new use of the term 'gay' isn't helping to normalise homosexuality, nor is it showing it through rose tinted spectacles, but the point is, it's not something that MAJORLY affects gay people, to the extent where it makes them commit suicide. People being singled out and bullied at school because they are gay causes people to kill themselves, yes, but using the word gay as a casual and meaningless insult does NOT. Otherwise we'd have already heard about it by now. Try to change my mind ? You'll have to try very hard.