CreateDebate


Catninja's Waterfall RSS

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

To answer the question you gave, "Is abortion the taking of human life?" I will point out that actually, abortion can be the saving of human life.

If a young girl gets pregnant before her body is able to safely deliver the baby, if there is an ectopic pregnancy, or if there are such serious medical complications that the baby cannot be delivered alive, an abortion will save the life of the mother. It may not save the life of the fetus, but in the case of medical emergency the fetus cannot always be saved.

As to whether it is human, it consists of human cells. This cannot be denied. Whether it is life is another matter. In its very earliest stages the zygote is not a life in its own right -- it is organic, but it is currently a cluster of cells without any kind of consciousness.

1 point

But if we do that, don't we risk implying that we can't be responsible for our own choices and actions?

1 point

I'm normally not one for conspiracy theories, but it does seem a little coincidental that Diana's bodyguard, with whom it was rumoured she was having an affair, was removed from his position and was killed three weeks later in a motorcycle accident.

I'm not convinced that Phillip would have made the decisions, though; Diana's actions were reflecting poorly on the rest of the Royal Family and I think it more likely that someone else (maybe someone who was responsible for maintaining their public image) made a private decision to have her killed.

1 point

If you can persuade me that you're willing to make a proper contribution to this debate, I will lift the ban I've just placed.

This is a serious debate. Please do not go off-topic.

1 point

Oh yes, I'm happy to disagree with people as long as it remains civil, and you've always been pretty civil towards me.

But it's a nice feeling when you realise you agree with someone on something.

1 point

That's not what he was actually saying, if you had read the OP.

He was saying that MANY Americans aren't interested in the rest of the world. Not the elite or those in power who have vested interests in what happens outside the USA, but the average American on a site like this one.

We aren't talking about the people who offer the UK gas, or keep a check on China. Those aren't the everyday Americans writing debate after debate and hypocritically belittling those who don't understand American issues because well, those people aren't American.

I have seen many a site where most people assume you to be American and are very surprised when they find out you aren't because "everyone's American on the Internet".

Considering the number of very samey US-centric arguments on here, this site is not much of an exception.

2 points

Jeffrey, I know we've had many disagreements on this site, but I completely agree with you on this.

I've seen several debaters trying to make specifically American issues relate to the whole world. For example, those who criticise "liberals" when what they actually mean is the American Democrat party and their supporters, or those who criticise "conservatives" when they mean Republicans.

1 point

I can see how it might be interpreted that way.

On the other hand, modern black culture is not all a result of white people. The concept of a collective culture may have been formed as a response to slavery and oppression, but the people who engage in that culture were the ones who shaped and influenced it.

1 point

This is the kind of attitude that makes me actually want to be a Christian again.

1 point

the most violent race of human beings throughout the history of mankind.

We can only assume this. In recent history, from perhaps the 1600s onwards, this is perhaps true, as white people were the most powerful racial group.

But we have no records for the time in history when all humans had a tribal mentality and would gang up on each other to steal land and resources, and wipe out other cultures. Furthermore, there were plenty of very violent non-European civilisations such as the Mongols, Atzecs and so on. There were plenty of very violent non-European leaders such as Mao and Pol Pot.

So in short; yes I agree with you on everything but the bit I quoted above. When Empress Wu was torturing her subjects and Attila the Hun was leading invasions, the Europeans were a disorganised rabble who still painted their faces with woad.

1 point

In some ways I feel like a country shouldn't ban something on religious grounds. Allowing one religion to have monopoly over the laws of a country can lead to escalating situations where the country becomes a totalitarian theocracy. For example, women in Saudi Arabia not being allowed to do anything without a male relative's permission.

However, consumption of beef is not a right, and if the majority of the population supports the ban then it should stay.

I would have said a fairer course of action to non-Hindus would have been to allow the consumption of beef in private property, but ban it from being sold by street vendors and in restaurants.

2 points

I voted Labour in June's General Election, but I may have voted Conservative if I'd liked their policies and Theresa May had struck me as actually being competent at her job. As it was, I preferred to vote May out and have another run with some new policies and ways of thinking. I didn't vote Labour because I was left-wing.

While I basically support everyone to have the same rights and freedoms, I don't shout about it from the rooftops and people who do that tend to give me the impression that they want to know how great and wonderful a citizen they are, rather than actually caring about the issues.

Although I'm bisexual, I'm not really a fan of the LGBT community as a group as the vocal people in that group strike me as being more aggressive than progressive. Similarly, I'm not really a fan of the modern day feminist community.

I have some more right-wing attitudes to education, child discipline and immigration. I don't agree with Trump, who is further right than I am, but I don't see the issue with having slower, more controlled immigration so public services can cope better with the population growth and requirement for people to understand more languages.

I don't see the issue with slapping a child on the wrist (in school or the home) as long as you aren't beating them or touching them inappropriately.

I am in favour of gun control, but most people in the UK support gun control and it's not particularly tied to a political party.

I oppose fox hunting, as most left- and right-wingers do.

I believe in people working hard to earn an appropriate place in society, and I believe that businesses are a good thing for the economy (but I also believe that they should not be allowed to grow more powerful than governments, and they should be paying, not dodging tax).

I strongly dislike being put into the left-wing box. I might lean slightly more left with my opinions than I do right, but I have more in common with someone slightly on the right than I do an extremist on the left.


1 of 21 Pages: Next >>

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