- 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
The fundamental issue regarding the abortion debate is not women's rights or other factors which concern personal autonomy, but over the status of the unborn child. Variants of the personal choice argument presuppose that the unborn child is not a human person, for if the unborn child is indeed a human person, then no amount of freedom justifies its elective termination. Henceforth, variants of the personal autonomy argument beg the question by presupposing their conclusions: they are valid if and only if the unborn are not human persons.
First premise is that it is prima facie morally wrong to kill any person. Jane English makes an interesting point that this is not always the case. For example, would not self-defense be a legitimate example of when killing a person is justified? However, the abortion opponent could also claim that fetus' are innocent entities, but even then prima facie it would seem that self-defense would still be legitimate.
A fetus is a person because it posses "intrinsic potentials". However, before that he admits that an argument that shows unborn are persons because they have the persons to become persons is absurd...
Thank you for giving that interesting point.
Homeless should help themselves and not rely on others for codependency but the truth is many of them have accepted the fact that they can't do that and so defend on the street asking for spare change and so fourth. So I do agree to that.
Where can we possibly supply the money to help these poor masses? Welfare you say? The government is digging into taxpayer money to pay for many other problems, and this just adds another weight onto their shoulders. Just too much is being spent on things to try to help this one group when it could be spent on things for the contributing members of society to use. This money should not be spent on the homeless. They aren't helping to pay for anything through taxes.
There are about 300,000 homeless people in Canada and about 750,000 in the United States.
When put into proportion these numbers can become quite significant. To provide every single one of these people with shelter would become quite expensive. Also, in many urban areas it may be hard to set aside land to build social housing. Many tax-payers would much rather have their tax dollars go towards things that directly benefit them, like healthcare and education.
I agree with you on that, but can you be more specific on why they are forced to be homeless?
Some people have taken advantage of welfare. They are being provided for WITHOUT contribution.
How can we expect the homeless to leave themselves in that kind of predicament? You can not apply this to EVERY homeless person.
No! We should not! >:[
U.S. is already dumb enough! We ranked 23 out of the WHOLE world in the Science area. India and China are WAY ahead of us!
Shortening our time at school is ridiculous. What type of schedules would we have? How would our parents know where we are, and what we are doing? D:
Responsibility? PUH-LEESE, at my school, you can see students gathering behind Big Savers getting down. And there was a girl who took pictures of herself...ahem and the police got involved. WHAT KIND OF RESPONSIBILITY IS THAT?!
[Thank you :D]
Money can't buy love.
What if we don't need love?
can't we go for luxury?
A dog? Man's best friend as they say.
Women can be waifs.
Men can just grow old, single.
Money is what pays for everything else.
If you don't like anyone,
Don't need anyone,
and are stacked with cash,
then enjoy [:
Let me be devil's advocate >:]
Hehehe...Well, I think they do NOT deserve it.
They are homeless, so what?
If they want to stay somewhere, we have shelters.
If they deny that, then I don't see why we should force them to accept.
If you wish to give them money,
For all we know, they could spend it on drugs.
And if we give, what do they do in return?
Mooch of others so they don't have to do the hard work?
We work our butts off on money,
just to give it to someone who doesn't work as hard??
From my experience:
Santa Monica.Homeless person sitting, this girl bought a burger from McDonald's. Gave it to him. And guess what he did. GUESS! O:<
He THREW it Right back at her. o___o
So yeah o__o I will add more later [:
Money only shows greed. Money can't buy love, it can only buy a placebo of the real thing.
Love ain't something to buy.
It's somethin that can make you cry.
It reaches into your heart,
and brings out your inner self.
Touches you, treats you,
reaches out like nothing else.
How is that proposing a strong argument? You may express "Creativity" in other ways. I know I do, I draw. Thoughts may be freely addressed to principles for "theme days" or "free dress" days. But otherwise, I see no point in not having uniform. Dress fashionably at your own time. Dress code is meant to identify student much easier.
SCHOOL IS FOR EDUCATION.
I don't see how being "fashionably appealing" at school, is helping at all.
A distraction to students is possible. Creating different social groups just by looks is possible. I KNOW. I've seen it >__>
Are grades improving? Should girls reveal themselves? Do characteristics matter so much?
I find that racism should have been set IN THE BEGINNING. I mean, all of us, different races of this world, we learned the ways of different places. I'm Chinese, and I have completely adapted to the American life. I can speak, read, and write English, but I am unable to do the same for Chinese. I have to take CLASSES. My point: Does that mean that we remember, or even KNOW the traditional ways of our culture? We've lived the way we are right now, not even knowing the traditional wedding ceremony for the Chinese. Or even the traditional-traditional ceremonies of the Vietnamese! With racism legal, we would be carrying on traditions, that have been passed on for centuries, until we began ending it as the world improved with technology, education, etc.
You can say we would have never discovered new technologies without other nations. But hey, the Chinese discovered gunpowder, and didn't even know what to use it for. But it doesn't mean we may NEVER figure out what we could use it for!
RACES HAVE BEEN STEREO-TYPED. And even so, I come by students who are pointing out things like, "Look at her small eyes..." or, "All Mexicans are stupid". If you make racism illegal, you might as well put all these students in jail or something. Because a whole lot of them talk like that. Damn, I even had a philosophical chair about this. A majority had gone to the opposition side (based on this debate question) and WOW, over half of them spoke just like I had mentioned too. >:[ It's not a thing of the past. Even when we say "That all men are created equal", You cannot guarantee everyone will follow with that statement.
Racism might as well be legal.
I do not mean any offense to those I have used as an example O: