Amendments are good. The Constitution now has Amendments left, right and centre! Whenever anyone refers to the Constitution they're almost always referring to an Amendment.
.
Like anything, it's ok to fix it to better suit the purpose of its existence, but there comes a time when a new model should be considered. You can change a sedan by upgrading some of its features to make it a four-wheel drive vehicle for mountaineering purposes, but a new design may well be a better idea.
.
A Constitution is a blueprint of many things, amongst them, the structure of a country's political system.
As it stands, do you think our political system need an overhaul to make it more democratic?
Does the Justice system have any flaws that can't be fixed with an amendment?
Are there any rights we need to add or remove?
Of course not.
It's more.
- Quantatively, 1 skin cell is 1 single cell, whereas a fetus is many more cells.
- Qualitatively, both are human, but a fetus has more potential and is unique (the skin cell is from an existing human with his/her DNA, a fetus has its own unique DNA).
Torture.
Torture by repeated raping.
Torture by repeated raping by other inmates.
Torture by repeated raping by other inmates using rough & unsterilized implements.
Torture by repeated raping by other inmates using rough & unsterilized implements for a long time.
Firstly, I think ecological sustainability is even more elusive than world peace. This is because:
- a) you have to know exactly how everything works together, as in how everything affects everything else. It's a mammoth of a task (excuse the pun).
- b) then, you try to intervene. A bigger mammoth of a task.
So, if we can't control ourselves and stop killing each other, there's no chance for ecological sustainability...
.
In 50 years, if all the insects disappeared, life would cease. If all the humans disappeared, life would flourish
This quote is useless because humans are not capable of destroying even 1 species of important insects, let alone all. If they all disappeared, it wouldn't be us that did it. They are much better at the survival game then we are.
The point of this quote is stupid because it's comparing the usefulness of one species with another. Being a part of the system, humans got here the same way as any other species: through Evolution. More specifically, we're a result of the process of Natural Selection. Humans are as natural as any other species here and nature is much larger than us. Stop thinking that we can control nature somehow.
Your first paragraph was promising.
Everything else that followed was unclear strings of words, strung together with a complete disregard for sense or purpose... sigh... You've completely missed the topic title yet again.
.
About the age thing, 'old man' suits me fine.
What about "the best defense is a good offense"?
If you wait for someone to attack you and then defend, there are more negatives for you because:
a - you don't know where or how they're going to attack, which makes it hard.
b - you're on home soil where your citizens are going to suffer the consequences of war.
.
So throwing the first punch before someone else punches you is better than trying to block a hit from virtually anywhere.
.
I think I've just redefined just cause for you there. It's not a pretty world I know, but life is more interesting with war!
Explanation have explanatory value. They impart knowledge you did not possess before the explanation was provided
Well, you didn't know that God created energy before I told you. Now you do because I gave you that knowledge!
.
How is that statement in any way useful?
It's useful because now you know who created energy and so you can die happy knowing something you didn't know before.
She could have been hiding a belly full of illicit drugs! Cops need people to comply. Although I don't understand why the driver has to sign anything! Guilt is proven by evidence, not the suspect's own signature! That's backward bullshit from a dictator's regime!
It's a circular effect.
First, society likes violence and the makers of games want to cash in on this, so they make violent games,
which flood society and it makes everyone think that this is normal behavior so they engage in violence more and like it more,
so on and so forth...
Democracy
People vote for their government, but they are not the government. Those in government hold all the information available to make judgement calls, especially the information sensitive to national security. The people don't have the information, so they can't be blamed. They should, however, choose leaders who they know to be morally sound.
.
Soldiers have free will
Yes, they have free will, but they lack the information to exercise that free will appropriately. If all soldiers act on the limited information available to them all the time, then there'd be chaos. A country cannot have an undisciplined defence force, which would be worse than not having one at all.
Soldiers vote for governments, but they are not governments.
Citizens/Soldiers don't have all the information (available to the government) to be able to judge whether or not a war is just or unjust before they participate in it.
All soldiers are made to believe that each war they fight is just by those who have the information. The leaders must convince soldiers that the wars they fight are just, otherwise they won't fight it (because they're human). War propaganda is used to dissuade enemy soldiers to disengage or to cause confusion in the ranks and reduce enemy morale.
.
So to summarize, a soldier does not have all of the information available for him to make a moral judgement on his actions in wars. He is also subjected to information (or misinformation) from the enemy that he cannot verify readily. He must continue to follow orders to prevent chaos. In short, he cannot be held morally responsible for following orders. If anyone is to be held responsible, it is those with all the information available to them. The public must choose leaders who they know to be morally righteous, otherwise the public is also to blame.
Well, you didn't say that at all in that post... but now that you've said it, here's my rebuttal:
It'd be great if we have another method of obtaining truths, but as it stands, we still don't, we might be working on it, but we haven't got it yet, so if a suspect remains completely silent (as in not saying a single word or making a single sound), then what dya do? YOU BEAT IT OUT OF THEM :)
You have distinctively chosen to ignore the connections with all my arguments and instead choose to break my arguments down to small particles
People do this so they can rebut each point individually, it helps to clarify issues. And it's only wrong if you quotemine. You should do this in your school debates. It's never too late to learn!
.
Your ignorance is pathetic because you're ignorant of the fact that you're ignorant. I've used the same argument to rebut all of your futile attempts at making a valid point, and it still stands! You're so stupid you don't know how close you are to actually making a valid point, instead you keep opening yourself up for more rebuttals.
.
Here's my point again:
The learning process, as I define it, is the process of noticing and retaining new information for later application. With this in mind, the stress of competition does not help because the brain retains info better when it's not under stress.
.
Now, read the debate title carefully, understand it and if you need to, define "learning process", then see if you can make a well formed argument in 1 or 2 sentences... I'm not holding my breathe though...
Ok, no more chitchats, cos chitchatting with you is quite frustrating...
Now, let's have a look at very simple example ok? Don't mess this up now:
Let's have a look at: Bike riding
So we have the following elements:
Process of learning: how to ride a bike.
Competition:a bike race with 20,000-dollar prize money.
Cooperation:the help of someone who already knows how to ride a bike.
.
Now, you're arguing that competition is beneficial to the learning process.
.
I'm arguing that competition is not beneficial to the learning process. Still with me? Ok, good...
.
Now, let's apply competition to the learning process and put people who wish to learn how to ride a bike into a bike race. Let's give them about half a day to race each other. What do you think's gonna happen? My guess is they'll try to push along with their legs because they can't yet balance without them, and in the heat of competition they'll probably fall over lotsa times and hurt themselves because they'll be going too fast to control their motion. At the end of the given time, they won't have learnt how to ride a bike.
.
Now, let's apply cooperation to the learning process and pair people who wish to learn how to ride a bike up with someone who could already ride and will help them learn by instructing, encouraging, feedback, answer questions, holding the bike while it's in motion to help them balance, etc. Give them the same half a day to learn. What dya think'll happen this time? My feelings are that they'll do a hell of a lot better than the other group.
.
You still haven't even told me your age, and choose to have fun at the expense of mine
Let's just say that I'm an adult and my age is of no concern to you. I wish to be judged by the strength (or lack thereof) of my words alone. If you hadn't told me your age, I'd still have made fun of you if you can't put a sentence together with correct grammar and a clear point. For proof, have a look at my other debates involving aveskde, although I didn't actually make fun of that individual for his inability to write, I made fun of his inability to come up with new arguments.
You still end up killing life regardless.
It's not animal life, so it makes me feel better!
You also end up taking space whether it be by cattle farming or crop farming
True, but it'll be less destructive no? A plantation is almost natural to the space it occupies, whereas a pig farm would be lotsa pigs in a space with lotsa infrastructure to support it...
some cultures cannot afford to grow healthy food or do not live in a place that is too hot or cold to produce crops and therefor must turn to meat?
We should give those poor souls our vegetables in exchange for their nice smiles :)
If it's not a choice, then fine. But if vegetarianism is a choice, shouldn't it be taken if it's better?
Ok, why don't you tell that to the vegan Chinese Shaolin monks when their weak & diseased bodies reduce your healthy meat-eating ass to a pulp :) I'd actually like to see that more than anything. Would probably pay to see it too :)
.
More people are suffering from diseases born of eating meat than those born of a vegan diet.
How much protein do you need each day?
What do you mean by "better"?
.
A male of about 6ft 6in tall:
His ideal body weight is 214 pounds, or 97.3 kilograms.
His daily protein intake requirement is 43.8 grams to 77.8 grams.
At the max level of 77.8g he can achieve it by eating about 300 grams of meat or the same amount of pumpkin seeds, peanut butter or most dairy products like cheese... Eating a variety is not only much better for you, it's less boring as well!
The "context" and "edge" you're referring to is called the thrill of defying authority, of rebellion, of eating the forbidden apple... it's nice to get yourself a rush, but if I catch those bastards, they'll end up hating art for the rest of their potentially happy lives... :)
It's a near miss.
The word "near" is referring to physical proximity, not the adverb "nearly" meaning almost. So because it didn't actually hit, it can't be a hit at all. It's a miss.
In love, when 2 objects almost collide, it is a missed opportunity.
In a fight, it is a goddam shame :)
In terms of movements in the heavens, it's a noteworthy event!
Preservation - It's the farming of animals for meat that harms other species in the wild. The farms take over their natural habitats, they are culled to protect the farm animals. The bottom line: we're losing more species then we can preserve through farming.
Talented artists should use a proper medium for the art so budding junior artists could follow their lead. Their talent puts them in a position of leadership whether they like it or not, and they should use this position to influence others for good. What's wrong with hiring out a gallery and setting it up to look just like the ghetto walls on the street?
If I catch one of those fucks I'd begin a most enjoyable torture schedule ever filmed in the history of mankind. It'll be streaming live on utube for as long as I decide to keep him!
First I'd remove each fingernail with my teeth, then I'd sterilize them with salt of course, you don't want them to fester and go smelly... then I'd ask him which hand he used to tag my car and if he didn't want to tell me immediately, i'd break a finger at the farthest joint. Once he kindly tells me the hand he used, I'd strip that hand of all of the skin and then set my pet rat (which i'd been starving for the purpose) on it... hmmm.. after that I should probably let him go back to his mother... he'd probably not draw anything for the rest of his life... shame though cos taggers have such potentials to be great artists...
Scientifically it's impossible for nothing to turn into something. Yet we're all here. God must have created us. If you can't understand that, then you're denying God's existence out of stubbornness. Your punishment is that you'll remain blind and stupid for the rest of your life even though you've got eyes and a brain in perfect working order... :)
Smart-ass? Don't elevate yourself. You're more a dumb-ass
C'mon, you know I'm a smart-ass :)
.
Can it be? Did you ACTUALLY concede a point and LEARN something
Now, there's definite signs you're hallucinating... failing to see sarcasm like that, must be the desperation for victory coupled with the frustration of knowing you don't have the ability to ever get there... ok fine, you can keep that point for your team, but if anyone else asks: I didn't give it to you, mkay?
.
Finally a link to something interesting... by st. Peter's dusty gown I can't believe it! Damn you really know how to make us wait... respect for you restored, a little bit... Now, thanks for highlighting the abuse of the law, I do hope the Obama administration will keep to its words on more transparency and tighter control... something I've been advocating since the beginning of this debate.
What you shoulda done was to compare your perceived intelligence with your debating ability. See, you and your recycled rhetorics no matter how intelligent they sound doesn't change the way people see your lack of imagination when it comes to debating... Given that you've pretty much got it bagged with your side of the debate, you still manage to fumble and never quite get there in the end... if only you'd think of something other than the: abuse, doesn't work, human rights defense that have already been shot to shreads numerous times...
But wait, there's more!
.
You keep saying that as if you have no idea how torture works, and you think there's some magic technique that works all the time - Magic technique? For the life of me I can't find where it is I said anything about a single technique...
.
go get waterboarded and then come back and tell me it isn't abuse - I should go and get tortured so you can make a point? Right...
.
Why are you even on this debate if you don't even know what torture is, and what our rights are? You're really dense - Right, if I don't agree with your definition of torture, I'm dense... gottit!
.
This is the same as using the legal definition of murder to defend someone's right to kill another human being under a certain circumstance - you're getting really desperate now... comparing taking someone's life to application of pain for the extraction of information.
You resort to hyperbole in nearly every post...
You accuse me of using hyperboles, right, here's a list of hyperboles I gathered from YOUR posts:
Oh it starts that way, the exceptional circumstances one can imagine to justify inflicting severe pain upon a person in order to get information. Then it becomes about using torture on normal suspects because it's easier, and then your rights just vanish so quickly and now you look no better than the backwards countries in Africa, the Middle East - sure we'll become Africa and the Middle East.
.
This is why people downrate you all the time. You display a child's understanding of ethics and morality. I shouldn't be surprised though, this site attracts teenagers and you're probably still in high school - Anyone you cannot argue against is a child.
.
I would like to hope that we can rise above this type of behaviour in the same way we rose above cannibalism and slavery - eating people? wow... I was wrong, you DO have an imagination!
.
So how could you rationally defend us simply abandoning a core human right of protection over fear of a war or some dead people - abandoning a core human right of protection... are you like a woman experiencing PMS?
Gosh, u've really put me in my place now.
i think i'm gonna cry.
i was really hoping for something interesting to read, instead all i got was more of the same old shit: "I'm really smart and you're just a smart ass dammit! Why don't u go get an education! Blah blah blah"
.
solitary confinement is not torture, gotcha!
.
Never mind me saying we should regulate it for proper use and efficiency, you don't need to rebut any of that if you could just recycle the same old rhetorics, highlighting the most negative aspects of unregulated torture.
.
To the definition of torture, I'd like to add: the reading of stupid arguments from smart people like you.
Criminals are jailed, their freedom of movement taken away, that's a basic human right (article 13 of the UDHR).
Forget about human rights. When you infringe upon the rights of others, you have forgone your right to rights :)
Torture of criminals is as immoral as throwing them into prisons.
Why are you so unable to understand the obvious?
Dear oh dear, it is because I've rebut the arguments so many times before, but since you're still in lala land, here's the rescreening:
- Human rights applying to prisoners: Prisoners are deprived of many of their human rights already, article 13 of the UDHR being the primary right. If an inmate misbehaves, he/she gets the solitary confinement treatment, that's a form of torture. Why do we see fit to treat criminals differently from the more civilized population? It's because they're different!
- Abuse: this is a word that you use over and over and it denotes misuse of the practice of torture. Like many other things that can be abused (cigarettes, alcohol, power, trade practices, etc.), if properly regulated, it can be managed. But pain is just wrong right? To that I say, if a surgeon cuts you open to help you but in the process he causes you pain, is it still bad? If you need to lose 100 pounds and your personal trainer pushes you through a painful training schedule, is it still bad? If you're a drug addict and to kick your habit you have to go through a painful rehab program, is it bad?
- Effectiveness as a means of obtaining information: It's a proven method. The type of questions, the candidate, the methods all need to be considered to maximize effectiveness.
.
I trust this should settle your doubts. If you want to rebut any of these points, please do so with something more interesting this time.
I never claimed that we go to competitions just for the sake of learning, I have argued that it reinforces what we have learned
So it reinforces what you have learned, as in past tense? After learning? Not in the process of learning? So you'd learn something first, and then go to a competition to reinforce the knowledge? Are you arguing for my side? You are, aren't you? You're playing with me, aren't you?
.
And stop hurting me with your insults. I'm really hurt. I'm gonna go and cry now... Thanks a lot...
If we start blaming competition for problems that it doesn't openly cause, then we aren't doing any benefit for the competitors are we?
What am I blaming competition for? I'm simply saying that it isn't beneficial to the process of learning and that cooperation is in fact what's beneficial to the learning process.
.
It doesn't do a kid much if he can only read about martial arts and never test it in a safer and more rewarding environment (which is exactly what a competition is about 97% of the time).
Ok, now testing the skills of martial arts is best done in a cooperative environment with either your coach or friend in a friendly sparring session. This is not competition. Competition is when you go and enter a Martial Arts championship and take a trophy home if you win it... That's not a good environment for learning martial arts, if you don't know what you're doing, you're gonna get your ass kicked!!!
Group awards are actually given out, they just are very small in comparison to individual awards. Individual awards can actually work just as well, if the teachers actually did some motivation towards each individual student, and not just one or two
Right, so group awards are given out. Individual awards can work just as well if teachers directly motivate students... what point are you making towards the debate topic? Are you arguing for my side again?!...
One thing that competition teaches many competitors is respect, something you may want to take a note on. It is often taught by many competition holders to have respect for your opponents, which is a valued aspect of life. Okay, so some people may bring some "foul play" into competition, that isn't competition's fault! If it stresses respect, then how can it be blamed? Actually, some could be blamed, because some do not stress respect, and do little to promote it, but the same cannot be said for the majority of competitions out there. Then again, it is often also the fault of the individual, because some individuals, such as those who make use of "foul play," show no respect towards others, and therefore receive none. I wonder if that sounds familiar...
Right, gottit! Now, how does this all help your side of the debate? Losing focus again, are we?
Life as a competition is mainly for attentive reasons, in regard to the ones that you mentioned. If you are a restaurant owner, and your business has been low in the past few days because a new restaurant next door is cooking better food, then obviously changes need to be made if you want your business to survive. So, what do you do? You'll probably end up looking at redecorating either the restaurant appeal or the food appeal, and then you may look at expanding the menu. Not only that, but if you want to be a popular restaurant, then you may need to figure out what is popular among people in regard to certain foods at the time. Again, you develop a better understanding of things in order to achieve
Please state your point instead of just ranting.
regarding motivation, that... blah blah ...he/she can apply it him/herself (see your own post for the entire paragraph)
Ok, you've just basically argued for my side: You're saying that you have to learn before you compete in a real game. So learning comes first in a cooperative environment with your coach and friends. Once you've mastered the skills, you then apply it to competitions. Thanks for coming over to our side.
Competition is a highly relevant part of life, however, competition isn't what life is all about
I didn't say life is only about competition. Life can be many other things too. Amongst them, life is a competition.
.
The debate topic is "is competition beneficial to the learning process?"
I'm arguing "no". You have trouble understanding my arguments?
.
we aren't all looking for education. I use the site as practice, what do you use it for? A means of looking intelligent for once in your life? Probably...
Correct.
.
you shouldn't care why I am here or if I should be here
I didn't care why you're here. You're the one keep saying you're doing this for school, etc...
.
you should be more concerned with what I say rather than how I say it
And both what u say & how you say it are extremely poor.
Your present "debate tactics" don't work and you're running out of ideas
You're the one running out of ideas.
Before road rules exist and traffic lights were used, driving may be very bad for society too, because it would cause too many deaths, but guess what? People put in traffic lights and regulate road usage...
Just try and argue why we can't make torture work with regulations.
Did you look up the definition of torture? I even gave you a link to the wikipedia article. Abuse confers misuse, and that's why I've been arguing that we should regulate it. And don't equate murder to torture, you idiot.
...Abuse
...Doesn't work
...Human Rights
ZZZZZzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz
Protection from incarceration is not a human right
Did you just deny that the right to freedom of movement is a human right? Look up article 13 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
.
You mean this little gem which underpins you lack of ability to reason and substitute with hyperbole
Yes the little gem that you fail to even understand. Perhaps the sentence structure was too difficult?
.
I'm sorry, I can't take this statement seriously since I've yet to see negro slaves in cabins on plantations in the country
But you do see people working their asses off for little pay.
So I will repeat: The basic elements are still there, they simply go under different names and methods.
.
...and we aren't burning people alive in public displays any longer
Where were you when people were persecuted for being a communist?
Wake up idiot!
.
Torture is abuse, stop being stupid. Better yet, go get waterboarded and then come back and tell me it isn't abuse.
Again with the:
Abuse, Doesn't work, Human Rights bs...
I'll tell you what's abuse: Debating with dull idiots like you.
We already have laws that prevent it from leading to abuse: it is illegal in most civilised countries
It's called a ban, as in sweep it under the carpet even though it's happening on a regular basis, in most civilized countries.
It's called politicians can't be fucked dealing with it because most people are like you: don't deal with the problem, just ban it and ignore it when it happens and if anyone points out the fact that it happens, just show them that our laws ban it so it must mean it's not happening.
Abuse,
Doesn't work,
Human rights.
Next!
I honestly can't believe that you think that if it becomes legal, it is no longer torture, as if that has everything to do with it.
Stop pretending to be stupid, at the risk that I may believe you.
It is me or are you still on the 3 defeated points of your debate: abuse, doesn't work, human rights...
Next, please!
I thought you'd be smart enough to grasp that torture is by definition a form of emotional and physical abuse. I even pointed it out to you. But you just kept running with it, like you were oblivious to the fact.
I thought you'd be homosexual enough to grasp that torture is by definition a form of emotional and physical abuse. I even pointed it out to you. But you just kept running with it, like you were oblivious to the fact.
Again, look up torture, don't go wandering in the woods. Abuse confers misuse. Regulations should take care of that.
.
We do not have the right to abuse our prisoners.
I'm not saying we should. It's not abuse if you lawfully sanction it and do it properly.
.
I shouldn't have to even explain this preliminary stuff to you. Why are you even on this debate if you don't even know what torture is, and what our rights are?
Like I said, you're not very imaginative are you... Same old shit: doesn't work, abuse, human rights.
Next please!
Torture is applied to people BEFORE there is proof of guilt.
A search warrant allows officers of the law to completely turn your house upside down. Without the warrant, it's called invasion of privacy, breaking and entering, vandalism, etc... This is all done before any conviction by court. Now, torture should be regulated the same way to prevent abuse.
Don't go backwards.
You claim that torture is abuse so look up torture:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Torture
At the very top of the page, you'll find the definition of torture according to the UN Convention Against Torture. Torture is all of that.
Now take out all the bad stuff with regulations and then it won't be bad any more. Notice this sentence at the end of the definition:
"It does not include pain or suffering arising only from, inherent in, or incidental to, lawful sanctions." So if the law sanctioned it, it's not torture. Make it so.
Why don't you look at the title of this debate and tell me whether I've lost the debate or not... you're so blind you don't realize my answer to the title question is NO.
Which side are you on?
Have you got a point to make regarding the topic?
Are you even debating?
I figured that you were bright enough to see your error if it was highlighted with exaggeration. Was I wrong to assume you were capable of this?
I thought you were a potential waste of time. I'm now assured of it. You're incapable of any real arguments against torture. Instead, you rely on the assumptions that it doesn't work, on the abuse of it, and human rights, all of which are due to the fact that torture is not regulated. Come back and debate when you're more capable.
when you start to include OTHER criminals you only make the position you're defending even more offensive to human rights.
You have not rebut any of my arguments with anything intelligible. Human rights should see all prisoners no matter how violent or cunning or damaging to society go free. They're humans, no? They too should have the freedoms to do as they please? Why do we confine their existence to "rehabilitation facilities"? Your hypocritical attitude makes me sick.
.
Slavery is ownership. You are not owned by the company you work for, you can never be their possession. Employment confers wages, slavery does not. Learn the meaning of words before you try to be clever.
I explained the primary difference of slavery and employment in the very sentence that you quoted. Ridicule my "grasp of the language" all you want, until you can do the same, you're not even worth an insult to me.
.
I hate stupidity, and you're starting to cross my threshold for it
I was wondering when your inability to argue logically would result in your own frustration...
.
Society has changed
In your stupid rant, you failed to see the point of my statement that society hasn't changed. The basic elements are still there, they simply go under different names and methods. The world is still ruled by the rich and powerful few and the majority has illusions of freedom.
.
Torture is applied BEFORE guilt is ascertained, meaning that regulations which already exist are forfeit.
Torture is NOT efficient because it leads to wrong information, because the motivation for the tortured isn't truth.
Torture IS abuse, so your statement about safeguards is contradictory
See my post on how to manage torture, it outlines some basics. But to rebut your desperate points:
- Search warrants are issued before a person's guilt is ascertained.
- The motivation for the tortured is to stop the pain, not tell a lie.
- Torture is not abuse. Only in your head.
