Which would you rather see?
a) over 967 million people dead
b) 967 million people smoking and boosting the economy
If you picked a), you obviously contradict yourself. If you picked b), you know which is better.
It is impossible to make smoking illegal.
Around the world, there are millions of tobacconists whose main product is... tobacco. Making smoking illegal would hit them hard as the main reason people come in and buy their products is that they are looking for cigarettes. They earn a tidy profit from that and making their product illegal would be killing their business.
Once people start smoking, it is almost impossible to stop. Nicotine is dangerously addictive and considering the fact that over 967 million people smoke, approximately 966.9 million people will die from the lack of it. 966.9 million people. That is a little over 1/7 of the world's population, and over 1/7 people will die. I say over as some children smoke as well. It is illegal, but as recently portrayed in the news, numerous children smoke cigarettes. Since children's brains are still developing, once nicotine entered, it would stay there, reminding the brain to have more and more. If smoking was illegal, those children would die almost instantaneously.
Even though smoking is bad for everyone, making it illegal would kill close to a billion people. Smoking is a matter of choice. Let's keep it that way.
Then smoking would still be legal in some places like the chamber.
It technically is possible. Realistically, it is very unlikely.
If parents were not held responsible for children's discipline problems, then children who were not trained properly by their parents as to what is right and what is wrong would be receiving all the blame, when it really was the parents fault. Also, they would not be held fully responsible as the children could be responsible as well.
I agree with @kk0bbr's argument all except for point number two. If there we equal money, power and respect, the world would be chaos.
Let's start with if there was equal money. If there was equal money, many would not be content as greed is a large part in human nature, and the end result would be an even more imbalanced society as there would not be both rich and poor people to balance the scale, simply rich people and average earners.
Next, if there was equal power. If there was equal power, the America would be a state of anarchy, resulting in uncivilization and no rules/laws for citizens to follow. If people made rules, they would have more power, resulting in a big jolt for the economy and the state of everyday activities.
And last, if people had equal respect, we would have no-one to aspire to be like, no idol for us to follow the path of. We would be the same in a way. Also, it is impossible to keep everyone equally respected due to the fact that people engage in activities, which may decrease or elevate your level of respect given from others.
Overall, I agree that it would not make a difference.
Gender is never a part of who is better. Otherwise, the world would be a sexist place and everything would be biased and predictable. It all lies in a person's personality.
In debates, you must not be personal, or you will be marked down for that. And that is exactly what is going to happen. drops down Intagible's argument from 1 point to 0 points. To further rebut your argument, gender does not relate fully to personality. Furthermore, saying that female teachers are better than male teachers is sexist.
Well, you're source is very accurate, considering the fact that its creator broke copyright infringement laws. As against, I believe that there should be no distinction of which gender is better as it all matters about the people. There is no association to find who are better teachers through gender.
Hooray! They identified firearms. And now they want to use a device to scan through people's clothes. I feel so secure.(sarcasm used) Everything is SO private. Not.
The busy year for the TSA simply means that they receive a lot of customers. If the device was introduced, what would the customers be waiting for? A machine to use X-ray vision through their clothes? If that was the case, flying would be a big no go for me, and for many others who actually VALUE their privacy.
Firearms were found. Perfect! That's great! A new device is coming which will invade everyone's privacy. I think I'll pass.
The TSA are doing neither. It is blatantly obvious that the TSA think they can have 'fun' or play a prank while on their shift as baggage controllers. Once, my tablet went from inside a suitcase which was wrapped up in plastic wrap to floating around somewhere, lost. No one could have handled the luggage other than the baggage controllers. I can imagine them coming home saying to their kids, "Oh! Look! Daddy/Mummy brought you a new tablet today!" The TSA believe they are superior. There is no 90% security. That is just a made-up figure. So I say that before you state that anyone's argument is invalid, make sure that yours is valid. After re-reading your comment, I realized that you said that there should have been a 90% security. Well "should" does not cut it when it comes to serious matters. It is part of the human brain to engage in humorous events. But pranking is taking it a step too far. Around the world, people are losing things while going through security. They are not careless. They are simply following the rules. What is happening is that they are victims to the insecure flaws in air/border security. If the 90% was really real, it still wouldn't be enough. We need 100% security. It is part of human rights. More than 10% of people are facing the lack of security. That is more than 1 in 10 people. When it comes to security, there must be a 100% guarantee for all of us to be safe.
90% is completely false. Safety is a large topic and security and privacy are a big part of safety. 90% safety? I don't think so.
You're in your favorite cafe, sipping on some coffee and devouring a souffle when the prettiest girl you have ever seen walks in. She looks at you and continues to the counter. "Give me a cappuccino!" She barks at the barista. She takes her drink and sits down next to you. "Why are you staring at me, you creep?!" She shouts. You're so embarrassed. Your pleasant coffee break was ruined by a girl. You already forgot the fact that she is pulchritudinous, all you can remember are her rude remarks.
That is the common example when someone's outer beauty is not even matched by their inner beauty. At all. They are hideous and rude on the inside. Or it could be vice-versa. Someone "unpretty" is remarkably kind and caring in every way.
Watch this if you still aren't convinced. https://www.youtube.com/
