CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
You can share this debate in three different ways:
#1
#2
#3
Paste this URL into an email or IM:
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
Are You Aware That 56 Percent of The Republican Party Is Still Anti-Gay Marriage?
The fuck is wrong with you? It doesn't make any difference to your own lives if gay people can get married, so one has to presume your only motive is spite.
That doesn't worry me too much. Time will eventually take care of that IF we remain a democratic republic. What worries me is that most of that 56% is also anti-democracy / white nationalistic evangelical ….. or "anointed" with the brainwashing that allows one to absorb anti-Constitutional thoughts that are un-American, un-scientific and inhumane
Washington (CNN)California Rep. Eric Swalwell -- a recently announced Democratic presidential candidate -- said Sunday his call for a ban on assault weapons was not a step toward broader gun bans.
"You know, keep your pistols, keep your long rifles, keep your shotguns," Swalwell said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union" with Jake Tapper when asked about anxiety from gun owners that an assault weapons ban could be an incremental step to a larger gun ban.
He continued, "I want the most dangerous weapons, these weapons of war, out of the hands of the most dangerous people."
In Sunday's interview, Swalwell said the ban would come with criminal consequences for people who did not participate in the buy-back, but also suggested an "alternative, which would be to keep them at a hunting club or a shooting range."
ROTFFLMMFAO so the IDIOT does not think pistols, long rifles and your shotguns are WEAPONS of WAR !!!!!!!!!!! BOY your LEFTIST POLITICIANS are as CONFUSED as they come !
The brainwashing that allows one to absorb anti-Constitutional thoughts that are un-American RESIDE in the mind of TOTALITARIANS like ERIC SWALLOWWELL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
SPIDER refers to INHUMANE but does the CONFUSED FOOL have a thought about the RELIGION it supports ????????????
Homosexuality
What is Islam's position on the treatment of homosexuals?
Islam goes beyond merely disapproving of homosexuality. Sharia teaches that homosexuality is a vile form of fornication, punishable by death.
Abu Dawud (4448) - "If a man who is not married is seized committing sodomy, he will be stoned to death."
Homosexuals are beheaded, hanged and stoned in modern Saudi Arabia and Iran, where Muhammad's laws are applied most strictly. Five other Muslim countries also have the death penalty on their books for homosexual behavior. In the past, gays were burned.
As one cleric recently put it, the only point of theological debate is not whether the homosexual should be killed, but how it should be done. (See also Fatwa Islamiyah, which advocates burning and stoning).
SPIDER why is it you LEFTIST will not address a religion you support !!!!!!!!!!!!
That's easy for ME. There isn't a religion I support. I accept them all as necessary for some, I reject much of their rhetoric, all of their mythology. There are good people on both (all) sides …. (to paraphrase another idiot ;-), but, we'd be better of without them. All of them inject into society their share of …. outlaws. ;-)
Republicans were always going to come for Rep. Ilhan Omar.
From the moment the Minnesota Democrat was elected to Congress as one of the chamber's few Muslims — and a hijab-wearing Muslim, to boot — her destiny was fixed. Republican conservatives were always going to paint her as the enemy, depict her as un-American, and find some way to smear her with the 9/11 terror attacks on America. Fox's Jeanine Pirro was always going to say Omar's religious practices were incompatible with the Constitution. President Trump, who has a long history of picking on women of color anyway, was always going to shine his Twitter spotlight on her. West Virginia Republicans were always going to suggest she is a terrorist.
Now, the ugly din has grown so loud that Omar finds herself needing physical protection.
This sad debacle was inevitable. We should have seen it coming. Why? Because the GOP is the party of Islamophobia — and it is led by the sort of folks who see themselves in a "clash of civilizations" with one of the world's largest religions.
So LEFTIST your PARTY does not support RELIGION ??????????? It is LAUGHABLE as how FUCKIN STUPID you CONFUSED IDIOTS are !!!!!!!!!!
The liberal group MoveOn is calling on Democratic presidential candidates to skip this year’s AIPAC policy conference, citing the pro-Israel group’s links to the right-wing government of Benjamin Netanyahu and charging that AIPAC has flirted with Islamophobia.
So STUPID i ask you again does the LEFTIST PARTY not support the RELIGION of ISLAM!
Washington (CNN)California Rep. Eric Swalwell -- a recently announced Democratic presidential candidate -- said Sunday his call for a ban on assault weapons was not a step toward broader gun bans.
"You know, keep your pistols, keep your long rifles, keep your shotguns," Swalwell said Sunday on CNN's "State of the Union" with Jake Tapper when asked about anxiety from gun owners that an assault weapons ban could be an incremental step to a larger gun ban.
He continued, "I want the most dangerous weapons, these weapons of war, out of the hands of the most dangerous people."
In Sunday's interview, Swalwell said the ban would come with criminal consequences for people who did not participate in the buy-back, but also suggested an "alternative, which would be to keep them at a hunting club or a shooting range."
ROTFFLMMFAO so the IDIOT does not think pistols, long rifles and your shotguns are WEAPONS of WAR !!!!!!!!!!! BOY your LEFTIST POLITICIANS are as CONFUSED as they come !
The brainwashing that allows one to absorb anti-Constitutional thoughts that are un-American RESIDE in the mind of TOTALITARIANS like ERIC SWALLOWWELL !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Attitudes on same-sex marriage by political party identification
Three-quarters of Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents (75%) and fewer than half of Republicans and Republican leaners (44%) favor same-sex marriage.
Nom did what he so often does and quoted the very portion that disproves him. As quoted, 44% of Republican leaders favor same sex marriage. Of course failing to favor something does not equal favoring laws imposed against it. I don’t favor marijuana, neither do I favor current marijuana laws against it. But nuance isn’t a trait of lazy or dishonest thinkers.
Nom did what he so often does and quoted the very portion that disproves him.
You are doing what you always do which is lying.
As quoted, 44% of Republican leaders favor same sex marriage.
That isn't what was quoted, so this is just laughable, isn't it? You are falsely accusing me of what you yourself are guilty of. If 44 percent of Republicans are in favour of same sex marriage then 56 percent of Republicans are not in favour of same sex marriage. Just what the fuck is difficult to understand about that?
Of course failing to favor something does not equal favoring laws imposed against it.
We are talking about a law in the first place you blatant sophist idiot. Forty four percent of Republicans support the legality of same sex marriage, which necessarily means fifty six percent don't. To repeat myself again, what the literal fuck is difficult to understand about that?
I don’t favor marijuana
Marijuana is a drug, not a law or a political policy. You can neither be in favour of it, nor against it. It's going to exist whether you like it or not you boring corporate shill puppet.
neither do I favor current marijuana laws against it
Either you support marijuana laws or you don't. You claimed to be for marijuana but against marijuana laws, which OBVIOUSLY isn't the same thing. Your distortions of language are irritating and your false analogies even more so. Pretty much everything you write on the page is an abuse of the English language.
But nuance isn’t a trait of lazy or dishonest thinkers.
Get out you laughably stupid cunt. Stay out this time.
I support your position, but not your rhetoric (some percentage of folks refuse to take a position, it would be dishonest to include them in either side) or method (banning, etc.) There are lots of idiots on here who just post garbage - bront, outlaw, etc., but I don't put Amarel in this category.
Amarel might be pointing out that the 44% stat includes Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (only 37% of self-described Republicans indicated support.)
Or, that not everyone who doesn't indicate support is necessarily against - they may be neutral/undecided, etc.
Amarel might be pointing out that the 44% stat includes Republicans and Republican-leaning independents (only 37% of self-described Republicans indicated support.)
Not at all. That would mean 63 percent of Republicans would be against gay marriage and Amarel is here to distort language and proliferate farcically stupid fallacies in order to promote precisely that group of corrupt, mentally backwards lunatics.
Amarel is trying to insert his own mythological subgroup in the middle of favouring gay marriage and not favouring it.
I posted since you mentioned banning Amarel, but since he was allowed to post, you can see that he is indeed referencing the fact that some percentage does not answer affirmatively or negatively.
If you don't think so, you haven't read many studies, including this one:
I posted since you mentioned banning Amarel, but since he was allowed to post
I definitely banned him. He is a paid shill so it is perhaps unsurprising that he is able to circumvent bans.
you can see that he is indeed referencing the fact that some percentage does not answer affirmatively or negatively.
I literally just told you what he was referencing: a group which he invented in his own mind absent any evidence from the source.
Closed questions have only two answers. Are you in favour of same sex marriage is a closed question. If you abstain from answering you either are not included in the figures or the source will note that a particular percentage has abstained. Amarel had no evidence that any abstaining group was absent from the figures, nor had he any evidence of the size of any such group. What he was doing is called fishing for something to attack.
If you don't think so, you haven't read many studies, including this one
This is a study of the opinions of ordinary people you idiot, not a study of Republican politicians who are required to vote on the issue.
I haven't been on for a while so perhaps I missed something.
"Closed questions have only two answers"
What I posted is the final report from PEW research which described their methodology and responses.
If you look at page 14 (page 15 of the pdf), you will see the responses were "strongly favor", "favor", "strongly oppose", "oppose", and "DK/Ref" (don't know/refused to answer) - commonly referred to as the Likert scale.
I haven't been on for a while so perhaps I missed something.
Yeah, like the difference between attack and defence.
What I posted is the final report from PEW research which described their methodology and responses.
Bullshit. Why didn't you mention that when you posted it? I'm not downloading a PDF just to debunk you.
If you look at page 14 (page 15 of the pdf), you will see the responses were "strongly favor", "favor", "strongly oppose", "oppose", and "DK/Ref" (don't know/refused to answer) - commonly referred to as the Likert scale.
If you are not in favour of passing a law which legalises gay marriage you are therefore opposed to the legalisation of gay marriage. What the literal fuck is difficult to understand about that?
Furthermore, you fucking retard, you obviously don't understand that a neutral option is not a requirement for the Likert Scale. See:-
Likert scaling is a bipolar scaling method, measuring either positive or negative response to a statement. Sometimes an even-point scale is used, where the middle option of "Neither agree nor disagree" is not available. This is sometimes called a "forced choice" method, since the neutral option is removed.[10]
No neutral option was mentioned in the article and no link was provided to the thing you claim is a PDF of the "final report". In summary you're talking complete fucking bollocks.
"Based on polling in 2019, a majority of Americans (61%) support same-sex marriage, while 31% oppose it."
Is my debate about "Americans" or the Republican Party?
Then get out. I'm done watching you point to apples and pretend they are oranges. The statistics you have posted have literally no connection or relevance to the number of Republicans who are opposed to gay marriage.
Do you think pew allowed Americans to not answer, but not Republicans?
I think that because PEW referenced one set of data which included a neutral option (for the public), one should not pretend that means PEW used a neutral option for its own separate set of data (for Republicans required to vote on the issue). That is called an association fallacy and it is an abuse of logic.
What is missing is you having the honesty not to arbitrarily connect two different sets of data and pretend they are the same fucking piece of research!!!
They aren't two different studies - it is the same one.
Liar. You literally made that up.
You are making yourself look foolish
By keeping a window open for an hour just so you can spew out more empty rhetoric and false statements which are supported by absolutely nothing except your own hot air? That's just plain sad. You cared that much about replying you literally kept a reply window open for an hour. Lol.