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.
Should Conservatives Be Ashamed Of Themselves?
Even if we are lenient and give these useless 4th century throwbacks a pass on their complete lack of empathy and understanding, they still come out on the wrong side of stupid. Even if we stretch reality far enough to assume for just a moment that their raging anti-Islamic views contain a shred of credibility, who in their right mind wants a war against an army which boasts one and a half billion soldiers? That isn't a war you can win. That's a war which is going to get everybody killed.
Why are Conservatives afflicted with this horrific brand of arrogant stupidity?
My dear boy, everyone on this earth should be ashamed of themselves.
We've all contributed to the destruction of our planet by sitting idly by and permitting such industrial giants as the petrochemical corporations make $billions from the manufacture and sale of plastic products and packaging, all of which helps to choke our oceans and poison our atmosphere.
Whilst we're being waylaid with left or right politics our world is dying at an ever accelerating rate.
Well put. I have seen you discuss this issue very robustly several times I can think of now (I am quite new to the forum relative to you).
I must say though, how does this comport with your "Free Market" Capitalism views? Do you take the stance that the consumers who support these industries are essentially the sole reason for their existence and thus it is the average person that should be looking in the mirror and taking a stand before pointing the finger elsewhere (at said corporations, ect.)? Also, if people refuse to take personal responsibility en masse, should we allow this extremely dangerous dynamic to run its course as the Free Market dictates?
I would respond to your query by stating that my 'green views are not in any way incompatible with my free market position.
Marketing with a capital M is having what people need or want, and not what you think they should want.
Selling with a capital S is convincing people to buy what you've got.
'People are the market and they, and they alone determine what the manufacturers make and how their products are packaged.
If we, the people mindlessly accept how the goods we purchase are made and packaged then we will, by default, condemn future generations to a toxic world where the oceans are poisoned with millions of tonnes of plastic waste, mercury and a witches brew of other pollutants.
The wearing of respiratory masks will become absolutely necessary every time we venture out into the lethal atmosphere of our towns and cities.
If the public, ( the market) can be made aware how they are sleepwalking towards the demise of their planet earth, they will demand more environment friendly manufactured goods and packaging processes.
The free market will then see the emergence of one or more forward looking corporations that will produce what the market( i.e, the buying public) want and they will temporarily capture most of whatever market sector they're in.
I say temporarily because the competition which exists within the free market would quickly adapt to the changing market conditions and before long the use of poisonous chemicals will either be eliminated or reduced to levels which the ecosystem can deal with.
We can all help to get the message to the corporate giants that they have been smoked out and must begin producing their goods using more environmentally friendly processes.
*THEY WILL REACT TO ''FREE MARKET FORCES'' BUT WILL NOT DO SO VOLUNTARILY.
I thought this would be your position; which gets us back to a previous topic we have explored briefly.
The current system is essentially catering to the average persons ignorance, delusions, mammalian instincts/world view, ect. ect. (as they are in the overwhelming majority) and unless this is fundamentally challenged, then it will always inevitably produce a highly dysfunctional society (dangerously so--as is our current situation).
Now, the current "Free Market/quasi-Free Market" (as well as "standard" Social Democratic Market systems in other countries--although not at the same rate) are demonstrably running the ecosystem and humanity off of a Cliff and those in favor of this path argue "so be it--if that is what the people decide".
Do you see any potential practical and/or ethical concerns with this scheme?
We can all help to get the message to the corporate giants that they have been smoked out and must begin producing their goods using more environmentally friendly processes.
THEY WILL REACT TO ''FREE MARKET FORCES'' BUT WILL NOT DO SO VOLUNTARILY.
I am in complete agreement with you here.
However, is there any evidence to suggest that the overwhelming majority of people will fundamentally make more rational choices en masse consistently (given our current model)?
I say temporarily because the competition which exists within the free market would quickly adapt to the changing market conditions and before long the use of poisonous chemicals will either be eliminated or reduced to levels which the ecosystem can deal with.
We can all help to get the message to the corporate giants that they have been smoked out and must begin producing their goods using more environmentally friendly processes.
THEY WILL REACT TO ''FREE MARKET FORCES'' BUT WILL NOT DO SO VOLUNTARILY.
This is absolutely absurd. You can't put the burden of saving the environment on the consumer when it is the manufacturer causing the problems. Producing environmentally friendly goods will raise costs which the consumer will not wish to bear.
You can't put the burden of saving the environment on the consumer when it is the manufacturer causing the problems
This is absolutely absurd, the burden of saving the environment and maintaining it should be shared by all humans. The manufacturer is the one manufacturing and the consumer is the one funding the manufacturer, both are contributing to the current state of things. The blame for this however, can be put on neither at the end of the day, because it is the very structure of society itself which creates the problem.
Producing environmentally friendly goods will raise costs
Isn't that funny, the thing that costs less resources and less environmental damage often tends to cost more "conceptual access to resources points" AKA money. This is the problem, the profit incentive and the not wanting to pay for overly expensive shit incentive is undermining the real actual things that matter. This is one of the reasons the monetary system is obsolete and illogical. It creates an artificial barrier between what is technically possible, practical and optimal and what is "economical" and what generates profit.
This is absolutely absurd, the burden of saving the environment and maintaining it should be shared by all humans.
You think it is absurd to expect the same people who are causing the problem to fix the problem? Why do I have a responsibility to fix a problem you are causing?
Nevermind answering that, FactMachine. I'm going to automatically ban every account of yours I see because you are an absolutely phenomenal idiot.
You think it is absurd to expect the same people who are causing the problem to fix the problem?
Hmm...much to learn you still have...
A business no one does business with, exist it cannot.
A government no one obeys, exist it cannot.
Who is more of a fool? The fool or the fool who follows him?
Who is more of a fool? The fool who sells, or the fool who buys from him?
Take advantage of the gullibility and passivity of the masses the tyrants and corporations do. There is no "blame" on anyone to be put, a condition built upon a foundation of stupidity and greed preceding from a condition of scarcity it is. The result of the mammalian competition for resources it is. Rectify this you can not, unless you can change the environments and incentives which condition people into states stupidity and/or greed. A wise Jedi master once said....
Human behavior is subject to the same laws as any other natural phenomenon. Our customs, behaviors, and values are byproducts of our culture. No one is born with greed, prejudice, bigotry, patriotism and hatred; these are all learned behavior patterns. If the environment is unaltered, similar behavior will reoccur.
A business no one does business with, exist it cannot.
The businesses which do not not raise costs because of environmental concerns will be EXACTLY the businesses customers use, you persistently stupid idiot.
Did you like that? The way I destroyed your long wall of bullshit in a single sentence? Cringeworthy, completely unoriginal impersonations make you intelligent will not.
I find your hyper oversimplification fallacies tedious.
When you really think about it, (or at least just think for once in your life in the first place) You are actually supporting my argument. The businesses which do not not raise costs because of environmental concerns will be EXACTLY the businesses customers use because the structure of society allows you to be rewarded for doing this. The businesses are no more to blame for taking advantage of this than the consumers are for letting it be this way. If society didn't reward environmental destruction by making everything that is sustainable either more expensive or not profitable (My favorite example, Tesla for instance) then these natural responses to the given environment and social condition would not take place.
When you really think about it, (or at least just think for once in your life in the first place) You are actually supporting my argument
Ahahahahahahaha!
FactMachine, when you are retarded, then all persistence earns you is the title of a a persistent retard.
the structure of society allows you to be rewarded for doing this
If a business has to increase costs to pay for new manufacturing and clean energy requirements, the cost of their product increases to compensate. When that happens, customers go elsewhere and get a better deal. It isn't rocket science. That is how business works.
Poor old “ comrade “Nom thinks communism is superior to capitalism because it heroically overcomes problems that do not exist in any other system.
Hi Dermot. I have been considering your argument that blacks have inferior genes to whites. On the same basis, do you accept that Irishmen have inferior genes to Englishmen?
But I never claimed this comrade you're the one who constantly calls blacks niggers , in fairness Marx and Engels would be proud of you as you are entirely in line with their views on the subject
I see your latest tactic is banning me and others from your debates like the coward you are , how do you expect to learn you thick English prick unless you let your betters tutor you ?
you're the one who constantly calls blacks niggers
Show me one example of this. I'm afraid you'll have to do it in a separate thread though, because I'm banning you from this one. I don't like Nazis. Especially Irish ones.
While you're here though, here's some light reading material so you can educate yourself above the level of every other sneering Islamaphobic bigot. Not that you will, of course. I have noticed that when people are retarded enough to support Hitler's eugenics programs of the 1930s, they very rarely are the reasonable kind:-
For instance, child marriage in Islam is justified on the basis of a hadith in Bukhari, which says that the Prophet married Hazrat Aisha when she was just six and consummated the marriage when she was nine.
This hadith cannot be true for several reasons. First, the Prophet could not have gone against the Quran to marry a physically and intellectually immature child. Secondly, the age of Hazrat Aisha can be easily calculated from the age of her elder sister Hazrat Asma who was 10 years older than Hazrat Aisha. Waliuddin Muhammad Abdullah Al-Khateeb al Amri Tabrizi the famous author of Mishkath, in his biography of narrators (Asma ur Rijal), writes that Hazrat Asma died in the year 73 Hijri at the age of 100, ten or twelve days after the martyrdom of her son Abdullah Ibn Zubair. It is common knowledge that the Islamic calendar starts from the year of the Hijrah or the Prophet’s migration from Mecca to Medina.
Therefore, by deducting 73, the year of Hazrat Asma’s death, from 100, her age at that time, we can easily conclude that she was 27 years old during Hijra.
This puts the age of Hazrat Aisha at 17 during the same period. As all biographers of the Prophet agree that he consummated his marriage with Hazrat Aisha in the year 2 Hijri it can be conclusively said that she was 19 at that time and not nine as alleged in the aforementioned hadiths.
We all know conservatives are the ones destroying the environment. Conservative politics favor the corporate elite over the working class and conservatives deny climate change. You cannot deny this, conservatives don't give a fuck about the environment.
As Antrim points out, we (the average citizen) are the one's supporting it and without our support it wouldn't be possible for such corporations to exist (in their current format)
Speak for yourself, I have a carbon neutral organic farm buddy. I drive a Tesla and use solar energy and wind energy. I don't rely on the big corporations for my food or energy. And even if I did I am not the one who keeps voting for the status quo. If we put enough conservatives in office we won't have to worry about climate change, because we'll just end up going back to the stone ages anyway.
You missed the point. Even if what you claimed were true (which I highly doubt), then that still is not at all how the average person lives in our modern, developed nations as we take these (largely unnecessary) luxuries for granted (rather than a privilege). All of us that participate in this and/or do not attempt to stop it in some way share a huge burden of guilt for this happening.
You seem to think that one can simply pledge allegiance to Left-leaning economic positions and be granted a significant moral high-ground--without making any real adjustments in their personal life.
Even if what you claimed were true (which I highly doubt), then that still is not at all how the average person lives
The average person is the victim of living in a stupid conservative society and succumbing to it's stupidity. And you only doubt it because I disagree with you, you cattywampus whopperjawed ding dong fiddler.
we take these (largely unnecessary) luxuries for granted (rather than a privilege)
You ignorant fool, we could have it much much better if we had a government which served its people but instead you see a half way decent life as an unnecessary luxury.
You seem to think that one can simply pledge allegiance to Left-leaning economic positions and be granted a significant moral high-ground--without making any real adjustments in their personal life.
You seem to think that one can simply pledge allegiance to the Hitlerian ideology of the right and blast CO2 haphazardly into the ecosystem have the same moral ground as someone who wants equality and freedom and sustainability and to feed the poor.
With the sedan's starting price of $35,000, Tesla isn't wrong to tout its affordability. But the car could cost a lot more by the time you get through the ordering process.Aug 14, 2017
Are the fossil fuels used to make a Tesla going to add to the false claim of climate change you concern yourself with ?
Because you're stupid. JK, it's because this isn't an "all or nothing " issue. We don't have to produce 0 CO2, we just have to reduce our emissions enough to not fuck up the whole ecosystem.
What I mean is some components of the car required the emission of CO2 to produce but the actual car itself and the assembly of the car do not release CO2
My tires are made from the flesh of dead conservatives.I ran over so many conservatives the rubber wore out but all the organs got crushed into a rubbery coating.
Politics is politics. Everyone gets dirty and everyone has something to be ashamed of doing or allowing to be done.
At the present, many conservatives who would otherwise be fine people (the religious, the older generations, etc) not only placed a bombastic abrasive arrogant man-child into power in the name of conservatism but also have actively shielded him from scrutiny and accountability. Basically conservatives have aided and abetted: treason, graft, bigotry, and I'm sure a whole lot more.
You can be conservative, attack liberals, champion your political issues, etc, all of that is fine. But when you enshrine and protect a man whose behaviors virtually every day are an affront to what the religious and the older generations supposedly stand for you pass the threshhold where it can be dismissed as simply politics.
This is your man. You're in bed with him. You're the ones willing to look the other way while he screws everyone and steals their wallets. Don't worry, he'll get around to yours, too.
This is your man. You're in bed with him. You're the ones willing to look the other way while he screws everyone and steals their wallets. Don't worry, he'll get around to yours, too.
Last Dear Leader put us $20 trillion in debt. And no lib can even muster a whimper as to what the hell it was spent on.
Insurance premiums went through the roof and people with insurance couldn't afford a doctor, which is identical to having no insurance.
We never hit 3% economic growth in any year. Obama is the first President in U.S. history to never hit 3%. Trump hit 4% in his first year, with no prior 7 years of Presidential experience, and in a year that had an unprecidented armada of natural disasters. It could have been 5% or 6%.
He, Obama, essentially handed a weakened Iran $150 billion, $3 billion in cash.
Taxes are going down, wages are going up, companies are raising their minimum wage, and companies are passing out $1,000 and $2,000 bonuses like candy.
African American unemployment is the lowest in American history at 6%. It was 16% under Obama.
The stock market is up 40%. 40%!!!!!! It's at 26,000!!!!!! That means everyone's 401K retirement plans went through the roof.
Bush the clown. Do I need point out the housing crisis and mindless spending that started this debt freak show?
Whitewater was a real estate scandal by the Clintons to job America.
Chinagate was Bill's hand to China's and our pocket.
The Clinton Foundation is a mafia-esque money laundering pay for play scam.
And you are worried about Trump stealing your wallet? Really?
Grenache. This is what winning looks like. Obama was what getting your nuts kicked into your throat feels like. You actually wanna go back to when blacks couldn't get a job, money was spent like it came from a faucet, and 401K plans were squat compared to now? Count me out. I like success. I like it when the country does well...
I have no desire to take a nice warm piss on America that smells like a mix of the Clintons', the Bushes', and Obama's whiz.
You can be conservative, attack liberals, champion your political issues, etc, all of that is fine. But when you enshrine and protect a man whose behaviors virtually every day are an affront to what the religious and the older generations supposedly stand for
Oh please. Seriously Grenache? Let's pause a minute. Just imagine if Trump finished a speech, did a mic drop, named a failing healthcare system after himself, had gangster rappers throw wild parties at the Whitehouse, ousted two leaders from Egypt and Libya manifesting over 200,000 ISIS militants, had Benghazi on his plate, funneled billions to Iran who was almost broke, left thousands of military grade weapons and vehicles in Iraq that were stockpiled by ISIS, his healthcare system tanked, premiums shot through the roof, he never hit 3% economic growth, and he was whistle blown on for spying on Americans and candidates for President from the opposition party through the NSA. The left would destroy him. He'd already be gone. You know it and I know it.
And while we're at it let's take a look at the magazine covers of both candidates just for grins.
Oh please. Seriously Grenache? Let's pause a minute. Just imagine if Trump finished a speech, did a mic drop, named a failing healthcare system after himself
Bronto, you are such a ridiculously stupid liar that you quite literally cannot write a single sentence without making something up. The term "Obamacare" was not invented by Obama. It was invented by political lobbyist Jeanne Schulte Scott, who first used the term in an article for the trade journal, Healthcare Financial Management. Andy Martin then borrowed the phrase and used it in his blog. The rest is history.
Islam says to kill you, the infidel. It also says to do everything possible to take over nonmuslim countries. Are all Muslims this or that? No. But enough are that to ignore this would be insane.
As a conservative leaning American the only shame I feel about my political views is that I didn't have them earlier in life. The real shame is the ease in which peace loving people are duped by a divide and conquer tactic to proudly send our children off to war.
Islam was invented in the 7th century. At least learn the history of the thing you keep attacking, dopey. Islamic ideology is about three hundred years ahead of your pro-war, live-in-fear, everyone-is-your-enemy, warmongering, flag-flying idiocy.
They sacrifice live animals by slitting their throats in a blood bath at hajj and practice blood rituals where they cut themselves and their small children with knives when someone dies.
Judaism and Islam have many things in common. Muhammed took Judaism and added even more archaic thinking to it. The laws from Christ look nothing like either religion.
Yes, you are correct to point out that the Quran calls Jews apes and pigs and commands their death. It also tells of Muhammed beheading 850 Jewish prisoners in one battle. Heil Muhammed eh nom?
And what's really amazing is that Jesus stood against religious zealots and was basically a Jane, and Muhammed was archaic religiosity on steroids, was not merciful, was not peaceful, and preached war, amongst other questionable acts, and do you defend Jesus? Nope. You defend Muhammed. Sick.
I assure you, come live in a country where there are terrorist attacks every 2 weeks; where women cant go out at night from fear of being raped; where some stores are forbidden for non veiled women
(I'm not talking of an African country, or the middle east but of some European countries)
Though I must concede that the american approach to Islam is the wrong one, meaning it is not the most effective way to fight Islam
No I did not mean that, the travel ban is the best thing to do, but its only a first step: the second one should be teaching people about Islam, its teachings, its history in school for example, people will soon realise that we dont that in our contries
Thats great! (why california in particular?) I must assume then its not the case everywhere since some people told me islam was fundamentally non violent and liberated women
Germany, through its industrial dominance of Europe has forced most E.U., member states to share its WAR GUILT and accept millions of so called Muslim refugees. Mainly ECONOMIC refugees.
Not only did all of Europe have to suffer under the GERMAN JACK BOOT during two horrific world wars, but this said same nation is now coercing the smaller European countries to accept countless numbers of Muslim rapists, criminals and dedicated terrorists to help ease their troubled conscience and to display to the world how awfully jolly nice the nation of the stuka dive bombers, panzers AND CONCENTRATION CAMPS have become.
Like all half baked armchair politicians, you say, ''the American approach to Islam is wrong''.
Okay, let's have your detailed proposed alternative.
You are 150% right, about germany,the economic refugies and the war guilt ( though it supprises me that you know about it I did not think it was common knowledge in America: how did you learn about it?)
About the "alternative", heres is a copy of what I wrote to bronto:
"No I did not mean that, the travel ban is the best thing to do, but its only a first step: the second one should be teaching people about Islam, its teachings, its history in school for example, people will soon realise that we dont that in our contries"
Thanks for that Cru., a reasoned and rational response.
Germany being the powerhouse of Europe is common knowledge as is mad Merkel's treachery towards her own people and her intimidation of the weaker E.U., members.
As in 1940, France capitulated to Germany and left the U.K., to stand against Nazis Germany alone.
I assure you, come live in a country where there are terrorist attacks every 2 weeks; where women cant go out at night from fear of being raped
The very fact that you seem to believe this describes Muslim countries and not America proves that you have never been to any of these countries. I question that you could even find the Middle East armed with a map.
The territory controlled by Islam makes Europe look like a dot on the map, and rather than telling them to clean up their show at home, you welcome them into your countries mindlessly and offer them benefits. Then they happily commit crimes, rape women, and hate your guts.
My statement described western countries that have a big number of muslims, I mentionned Europe because of that; America does not have the same problem or at least at not the same rate because the muslim presence is smaller
(PS: I was born in the US and have went there on vacation twice, though I've never been to the middle east)
You should be ashamed of yourself for being such a hypocrite. Take a look in the mirror and really ask yourself if you are really operating in a charitable manner.
Maybe you should be ashamed of believing in some homogenized group identity that you can feel accepted socially for being prejudice and mean spirited towards!
PS> By the way, I don’t judge conservatism by the conservatives on this site.
From my perspective (and bear in mind I live in a country governed by Conservatives), you are a Conservative and the other guys you're referring to are neo-Nazis.
You personally should be ashamed because the owner of the site has banned you on multiple accounts, but you are still infecting his site with your stupidity. You are fully aware that he does not want you here, yet you do not have any respect for his wishes.
