CreateDebate


Eccentric's Waterfall RSS

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

This is one of those times when it really depends on the situation. And there are always exceptions.

I know in my life there have been times when I felt that God was saying 'go left' and I wanted to go right. So I worked my tail off trying to go right but never really went anywhere.

But on the flip side, I can pray for hours asking God to send more clients to my business but most of the time the answer to my prayer wasn't a phone call from out of the blue from someone wanting my services. Rather, my answer is usually God leading me to 'do' something. And when I've obeyed and done it, I've gotten the new clients I was asking for.

So really, I say they go hand in hand. Pray first, then get off your duff and go do whatever it is that God tells you to do.

My $.02 worth anyway.

1 point

At this point I really think this race is going to be too close to call... a lot closer than what most Dems want to admit. But I believe there are enough undecided voters in the country that are smart enough to ignore the liberal media and just look at facts which plainly show that our economy was fine until the Democrats took over Congress.

4 points

Actually what makes it so bad isn't that they aren't informed. It's that they aren't informed but think they are.

And the media... well, the media is just a joke. I have yet to find a media source that isn't biased to some degree. And I've seen this in every presidential election since I was old enough to start paying attention. The media picks their favorite and does everything they can to help that person out. Even if they don't come out and say, "We're voting for XXXXX" they just refuse to cover stories that make that candidate look bad, while spending far too much time trying to make the other candidate look bad.

8 points

Who said the makers of the video were trying to add to the national dialogue? Why does everything invovling politics have to be so serious?

3 points

Energy crisis or not, nuclear power is too great a risk, especially with the threats of terrisem in todays world. And to top it off, there's still no easy answer to the question of 'how do we dispose of the waste?'

No, we should put that time and effort into building green energy sources that are truly green.

2 points

Currently we have an energy crisis looming, yet we haven't built any new power plants in who knows how long. Every time we try to build a power plant someone is offended and the whole project is put into jeopardy due to politics.

The people who build nuke plants are put in the situation of having to invest nearly decade into getting the permits and clearance needed to just break ground on a new plant. I believe that the permitting process needs to be cut down to where it takes less than two years (less than a year would be ideal) so that we can get some new plants online sometime this generation.

2 points

It's not a matter of a quick fix. We won't be free of foreign oil overnight no matter what we do. It's going to take time and multiple administrations. Right now we just need someone to get the ball rolling. Lifting the ban will take years to produce a drop of oil. However, the longest journey starts with a single step and I think this would be a step in the right direction.

-3 points
3 points

I don't believe the government, whether it be local, state, or national, should have the right to require me to wear a seat belt.

Some will claim that my right ends where other's rights begin. To which I ask for proof that people who don't wear seat belts have more accidents than those who do. Until that is proven I see no logical reason for the government to interfere in this area.

However, having been in accidents myself and worked accidents (when I was in law enforcement) I highly recommend that people wear their seat belts.

3 points

I don't see anywhere in the constitution that says we have a 'right' to health care. I think this would be yet another step toward a socialist government and away from the Republic that our forefathers created.

And, like ThePyg said, our government has a really crappy record when it comes to running businesses.

1 point

Personally, I think I'd like to go back to somewhere around 25 or so. Old enough to get the auto insurance discount, but still considered young by most. :) My $.02 worth.

3 points

A lot of people want to argue the fact. They all claim 'not me' while admitting that it does affect others. It's this same condition that causes people to get into a lot of other problems as well. We always want to say that we're the exception to the rule.

Studies have repeatedly shown that it does affect drivers and that the use of hands free devices does not negate the effects. Anyone that claims it doesn't affect them is in denial.

Supporting Evidence: Study on Driving while on Cellphone (www.eurekalert.org)
11 points

Like jwitter, I don't think it's the government's responsibility to subsidize private corporations. If they want to research stem cells, let 'em. Heck, if they want to research dog poop, let 'em. But don't expect the tax payers to foot the bill for it.

Everyone is talking about how promising it is. Well, that nice. But in the end this sort of research is a gamble. That's why the pharmaceutical companies want the government to pay for it. Because they know that no matter how promising it is, it could take years or even decades for something marketable to come out of it (if ever). There are more pressing issues for the government to support.

2 points

Firstly, the supposed benefits of embryonic stem cells isn't the issue. The issue was that the user I was replying to was using broad generalizations which were misleading.

However, you should know that while ASC's are limited in some areas, they do have certain advantages over ESC's. For starters, they appear to be able to renew themselves indefinitely, thus the shelf life issue you mention, really isn't an issue. Additionally, ASC's, unlike ESCs, would be immunologically compatible with the patient. Consequently there would be no risk of immunological rejection of organs, tissues or cells.

In the end, no one is saying you can do embryonic stem cell research. Just that the government won't be paying for it.

5 points

This really depends on what factors you use to determine best. If it's based on record sales then it's a toss up between Beatles and Elvis, but then you said band, so that leaves the Beatles.

But what if we base it on the most plays on the radio? Or maybe we could base it on the amount of money the band made? Or we could just base it on opinion that way everyone who doesn't agree is automatically wrong? I like that one, let's go with it!! My vote's for Bon Jovi :)

0 points
"85% of the country, democratic and republican, is in favor of?" Umm... where's your source on this one?
"We lost 7 years of stem cell research" isn't quite correct. You 'lost' 7 years of embryonic stem cell research. Adult stem cell research is still going strong.


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