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 do realize that when I meet fools, I ignore them. So tell me if I'm such a fool, why do you keep stalking me? If I'm doing Liberals no harm and am hurting Conservatives, you should be supporting me. But no, your words are a lie like everything else you say. Do you have clue what that says about you?
The sick thing about Liberals is their paranoia and fears over others hearing dissenting opinions. They must censor any thought going against their Liberal ideology. They must demonize those on the Right. Their notion of diversity is transgender drag queens. When it comes to Conservative thought, they hate your guts and try to silence your opinions.
I don't think you understand what it means to disagree with someone.
"The sick thing about Liberals is their paranoia and fears over others hearing dissenting opinions. " You are the one that bans Liberals from your debates, and you really have the audacity to accuse the left of censorship? Hypocrisy at its finest. Especially considering how you go on to accuse us of demonizing, after comparing us to Hitler, and endless other insults.
The Democrat party treat special needs kids differently. They support killing them. Did you know that Downs Syndrome children(special Olympic kids) were the majority of Partial birth Abortions? It took George Bush to have the humanity to stop that barbaric act. Bill Clinton and Democrats refused to stop it.
Now the Democrat party refuses to pass the GOP bill banning late term abortions past five months unless life of mother or extreme cases.
The so called compassionate Democrat party (what a crock!) constantly treat special needs Babies differently.
You mean the Democrats that created the Special Olympics?
Letting women decide when they are in the best position to know all of the circumstances, when government making it illegal is of little to no impact, when only 1% of abortions happen after 20 weeks (and many of those are wanted pregnancies) is different than encouraging abortions of special needs kids. Why do you think that abortions after 20 weeks happen so frequently and frivolously? Why is it not enough to use your free speech to encourage women to not get abortions and to counsel them on available alternatives rather than having big government decide which "extreme cases" are worthy? Define "exteme cases".
What a shock, you never answered the question. WHO CARES the exact numbers of Down Syndrome children killed after 5 months. They are the majority of late term abortions. So you are so dead inside you condone killing special needs children? Answer the question! Do you support killing special needs babies just because they are not a smart as others?
Well, a rhetorical question, a statement and a few more questions. Trying to fully understand where you are coming from isn't a bad thing, is it?
They are the majority of late term abortions.
No, they aren't.
you condone killing special needs children
Trusting that women are as able as the government, if not more, to make the decision for this, along with the myriad circumstances involved, is different than condoning.
You are either a liar or ignorant to the facts. During the Partial birth abortion hearings in Congress, doctors testified that Down syndrome children were the majority of late term abortions.
LOL, what a crock! That is the kind of amoral anything goes no fault thinking that is destroying this nation. So is it ok to kill down syndrome children after birth?
The Government makes decisions to save your life. Would you rather leave that up to the murderers? If you could even grasp the depth of inhumanity it takes to support even late term abortions for any reason.
Nothing in his statement implied any "no fault", or "anything goes" thinking. And you keep spouting this "late term abortions for any reason", but not a single person you have talked to supports that.
So, I have to ask, why do you continue to do so? What do you think you are accomplishing, Don Quixote?
1) You never asked a question. Even when you do they tend to be rhetorical.
2) The question is "Should people with Learning Disabilities/ Physical Disabilities be treated different?" so this is the question people should be answering rather than answering a statement by an egomaniac such as yourself.
As usual you liars deny the facts. The Democrat party supported Partial birth abortions that were done most often for down syndrome babies. To deny what the Democrat party supports makes you fools. It will get to the point where I ignore all of you and find another debate site.
Where is your evidence that Democrats "supports" partial birth abortion?
To date, you have only held up Democrats refusing to play political games with Republicans (who have refused to put up a bill that simply outlaws that which you hate), which proves nothing.
But if you wish to find another debate site, feel free. You'd probably fit in somewhere like Red State, where you wouldn't have to deal with such things as "differing opinions".
Well it is even worse than I thought. One doctor said 80% of late term abortions he performed was purely elective with no health problems and 20% were genetic. During the hearings they said Downs syndrome was the majority but maybe they did not want to admit the sick truth which flies in the face of pro abortion excuses where late term abortions are done purely for life or health of mother.
The health of mother clause allows abortions right up to 9 months which effectively allows any abortion.
"of late term abortions HE performed" Doesn't prove what you are claiming at all. The AAPLoG on the other hand claims that they are elective due to late diagnosis of pregnancy, which does not support your claims regarding Down Syndrome.
I do want to call to attention the fact that, according to your own source, you are talking about 1.3% of all abortions here. I agree that late-term elective abortions need to be stopped and are horrid, but you have been painting this issue in FAR broader terms than is reasonable.
Time to ignore, there is no humanity from you people. You should be outraged at the lies from the Left of how late term abortions are only done in extreme cases. THEY ARE LIARS and Democrats have the compassion of animals. The health of mother excuse allows any abortion at any stage.
You never cease to deliver with your over the top caricature of a conservative. I wonder how many people you've indirectly recruited for the Democrats now? I'm certain this isn't your only online presence.
It would be more effective if you made your conservative persona slightly less over the top. I've told you this before.
Gee after the last elections, I must have recruited millions of GOP voters. What planet do you lie on? YOUR SIDE JUST GOT DEMORALIZED IN THE MIDTERM ELECTIONS.
You advice would waste my time. There is no changing Liberals, they are indoctrinated fools like cult members. When I debate them it is like talking to clones over and over. They think like the collective and get their marching orders from the Liberal media and Democrat party. I'm only here in the hopes there are some who have not sold their souls to the political correct humanist religion.
You're not seriously claiming that you don't realize how bad your over-the-top caricature of a conservative extremist portrays the right, are you? Come on, we both know that anyone who actually believed what you say AND thought your tactics were effective in tilting the swing vote in favor of the right would be too dumb to live, right? I'm almost jaded enough to believe you might be serious and not just trolling, but not quite. No, you're trolling intentionally, I'm just not sure if the fact that you make the left look attractive by comparison to a moderate is intentional or just a side effect of trying to antagonize people.
You do realize that when I meet fools, I ignore them. So tell me if I'm such a fool, why do you keep stalking me? If I'm doing Liberals no harm and am hurting Conservatives, you should be supporting me. But no, your words are a lie like everything else you say. Do you have clue what that says about you?
The sick thing about Liberals is their paranoia and fears over others hearing dissenting opinions. They must censor any thought going against their Liberal ideology. They must demonize those on the Right. Their notion of diversity is transgender drag queens. When it comes to Conservative thought, they hate your guts and try to silence your opinions.
You do realize that when I meet fools, I ignore them. So tell me if I'm such a fool, why do you keep stalking me?
This is a relatively small site. I can't really be blamed if the most inane comments in the waterfall when I logon are yours. That's typically where I first turned.
If I'm doing Liberals no harm and am hurting Conservatives, you should be supporting me.
You assume that I'm buying what you're selling AND that I'm in favor of promoting Liberals and hurting conservatives. I'm not, in any of these cases. I do not believe your position is real, but rather a persona concoted to portray a gross caricature of a right-wing extremist. Whether your intent is merely to antagonize others or is something bigger, I'm not certain. Putting how fake you are aside, though... I'm in favor of reasonable discussion. Your extremist inflammatory discourse is counter to this, and it doesn't matter if the persona you're currently using is an extreme leftist or an extreme rightist; I'd do the same.
But no, your words are a lie like everything else you say. Do you have clue what that says about you?
That's just it- my words aren't lies, but your entire persona on here is. You'll forgive me if I don't particularly care what an antagonistic partisan troll persona believes that says about me. None of your premises make a shred of sense, so I can't really put any stock in your conclusions.
The sick thing about extremists is their paranoia and fears over others hearing dissenting opinions. They must censor any thought going against their ideology. They must demonize those on the other side. ... When it comes to dissenting thought, they hate your guts and try to silence your opinions.
Fixed that for you. You make yourself pretty obvious too.
Their notion of diversity is transgender drag queens.
Not exactly sure what you're saying here. There is certainly diversity evident between cisgendered and trans individuals. Or are you opposed to diversity in any form? That would seem to be the conservative angle.
You just can't be honest can you. You say "I can't really be blamed if the most inane comments in the waterfall when I logon are yours. That's typically where I first turned"
Now can you grasp what I'm talking about? You refuse to admit you stalk my posts. You try to claim you just stumble onto them and are not fixated on insulting me at every chance.
This is why I call you people such liars. YOU NEVER ADMIT THE TRUTHS of what you do or your motives.
I will help you since you seem to lack the ability to handle life. The next time you stumble onto some inane comments from the same person over and over, IGNORE IT!
But of course that would suggest that you were telling the truth... NOT!
You can take it as whatever you want. I respond to your posts in one of three cases.
1) Your post is in direct response to one of mine, giving me a new activity notification.
These replies represent approximately half of all of my responses to you.
2) Your post is prominently featured in the waterfall when I first log on.
This happens frequently. You seem to be active around the times that I am, and your posts do tend to stand out amongst others in the waterfall as being particularly short-sighted and inflammatory.
3) Your post is prominently displayed in a debate that I click into.
This happens occasionally in a relatively new debate.
I understand where you're coming from. That paranoia we talked about, along with your need to insult and belittle anyone who disagrees with you, and the fact that none of your arguments can hold up to even the slightest scrutiny can make it seem like a common critic is seeking you out in particular- but thats not the case. Trust me; I'll be replying to your next persona every bit as much, and I won't even have to know it's you.
You are correct, I have no clue what the waterfall is and guess what? It has NOTHING to do with what I said. If there were some idiots making stupid statements(and there are plenty on this site), I would never respond to them. WHO CARES if it is on some waterfall.
The facts are clear, those on this site fear the conservative message being put out to the readers. I have a very clear vision of what Liberalism is all about and make obvious points showing the hypocrisy and agendas of Liberals. This is why I am constantly attacked.
Except the facts aren't clear at all. People who respond to disagree with you do not "fear the conservative message", as evidenced by how people respond to the other conservatives on this website. Again, you are the only one here who has been censoring differing points of view, implying that you are the only one here fearing differing opinions. Of course, that would make you the hypocrite :P
Wait, so seeing your posts on the waterfall is stalking you? Do you know what stalking is?
He did admit the truth, by the way. He clicked on the waterfall, saw your posts, and responded to them. Why do you feel the need to pretend you are being stalked?
And if he disagrees with you, why would he have to ignore your post, instead of responding to it?
"Anyone who disagrees with me is indoctrinated" Do you not see how guilty you are of what you are accusing liberals of? You are simply angry that they do not agree with you, and so you insult and generalize them.
Do you really not see how someone saying that 20% are due to genetic issues does NOT support you saying that the vast majority are due to Down Syndrome??
What are you,10 years old? Were you alive during Bill Clinton's presidency? The GOP tried several times to get Partial birth abortions banned except for cases of life of Mother and extreme cases. Clinton and the Democrat party fought it every time and said the only way they would pass the ban was if it had a "health of mother" included in the language which of course would allow all abortions for any reason because the mother could simply tell the doctor she is depressed over the pregnancy. The GOP obviously knew this language was just a political game and would prevent no partial birth abortions.
When Bush became president, he finally signed the partial birth abortion ban.
If you follow politics at all you would have kept up with the Congressional hearings when doctors testified to what was involved with PBA's and it was then that they told Congress that Downs syndrome abortions were the majority.
Quit spewing the same lies that Democrats do not support late term abortions on demand. They will never admit supporting it for any reason at any stage. They just will never support any GOP bill to ban them unless they include some vague language that in effect would allow any abortion. Pure political game and people like you fall for it.
Must be the reason you are so ignorant to the Congressional hearings over PBA's is because Fox news was covering the hearings much more than the Liberal media. If you want to actually keep up with any news that that the Left does not want you to see, you must watch Fox news.
I created it open, but sent invitations to FromWithin and Daver (though the "invite" thing might just send you an email, and I have to admit I almost never check the email I used to set up this account.) Think it would be interesting.
"What are you,10 years old?" Ironic projection, considering your argumentation style.
"The GOP tried several times to get Partial birth abortions banned except for cases of life of Mother and extreme cases. Clinton and the Democrat party fought it every time and said the only way they would pass the ban was if it had a "health of mother" included in the language which of course would allow all abortions for any reason because the mother could simply tell the doctor she is depressed over the pregnancy. The GOP obviously knew this language was just a political game and would prevent no partial birth abortions." So you ARE opposed to including said language in bills against partial birth abortion, despite saying on here that you are not?
"If you follow politics at all you would have kept up with the Congressional hearings when doctors testified to what was involved with PBA's and it was then that they told Congress that Downs syndrome abortions were the majority." Then provide the quotes in a citation. If you "follow politics at all" you shouldn't have a hard time doing so.
"Quit spewing the same lies that Democrats do not support late term abortions on demand. They will never admit supporting it for any reason at any stage. They just will never support any GOP bill to ban them unless they include some vague language that in effect would allow any abortion. Pure political game and people like you fall for it." It really isn't a lie. If someone does not support something, it makes no sense that they would admit they do, when, in truth, they don't. Of course, you hate when Democrats play political games, but you are clearly eating it up when Republicans play political games. You are falling victim to the partisan dichotomy, "us vs them" system that really discourages intensive thinking.
"Must be the reason you are so ignorant to the Congressional hearings over PBA's is because Fox news was covering the hearings much more than the Liberal media. If you want to actually keep up with any news that that the Left does not want you to see, you must watch Fox news." Are you incapable of remembering, after me telling you a dozen times, that I do not watch liberal media? FOX is complete and utter worthless garbage, guilty of editing footage, race baiting, overtly lying, etc. As is MSNBC. The difference between you and me is that I don't forgive it when it is closer to my political ideology, while you embrace it whole heartedly.
You should go to Paris and visit one of those "no-go zones".
The difference between me and you is that you are a liar! You refuse to admit simple facts in the news. Why did you not take 5 seconds and Google Partial birth abortions and Down syndrome?
Nah you will never admit when you are wrong.
I have never said I support abortions for health of mother. THAT WOULD INCLUDE ANY ABORTION UNDER GUISE OF DEPRESSION. Tell me how any one could disprove if a mother is depressed. Even if she is depressed that is no excuse to kill a Baby. Unless the health issue is life threatening or some extreme case it is no excuse. Again you lie.
You could tell me something a thousand times & I would not believe it. There is not one conservative subject that I bring up that you agree with. You are a thousand times more Left leaning on all subjects and for you to claim you do not support the more left leaning of the two parties is laughable. Do you remember when you told me you don't vote for Democrats and then later told me you would vote for a Democrat to keep someone else from getting elected. You are a LIAR!
You don't seem to understand why lying is. Refusing to acknowledge facts is not lying, and its not even what is happening here. I did google partial birth abortions down syndrome, and didn't find any evidence that they made up the majority of said abortions. I am still awaiting evidence of that.
"I have never said I support abortions for health of mother. THAT WOULD INCLUDE ANY ABORTION UNDER GUISE OF DEPRESSION. Tell me how any one could disprove if a mother is depressed. Even if she is depressed that is no excuse to kill a Baby. Unless the health issue is life threatening or some extreme case it is no excuse. Again you lie." Not a lie, a deduction. You still don't understand the meaning of the word lie, much like hypocrite. You just use them over and over as if it is an insult.
"You could tell me something a thousand times & I would not believe it. There is not one conservative subject that I bring up that you agree with. You are a thousand times more Left leaning on all subjects and for you to claim you do not support the more left leaning of the two parties is laughable. Do you remember when you told me you don't vote for Democrats and then later told me you would vote for a Democrat to keep someone else from getting elected. You are a LIAR!" That is because I disagree with you, what a shocker. I do not support the Democratic party, and that is a fact. I have explained to you why, but you are so focused on hyper partisanship that you refuse to admit that you are wrong: That there are people who do not vote for either of the two primary parties. I told you I WOULD vote Democratic to keep Republicans from winning, but as of yet that has not happened. That would be voting against Republicans more than anything, but still remains irrelevant: I have never voted for a Democratic. I have only voted for Independents, Libertarians and Green Party.
You are incredibly ignorant, and unbelievably narcissistic. Learn how to cope with people not fitting into your preconceptions and stop trying to tell people what they think and how they vote. It is absurd.
For my argument I would like you to think of a human that is so mentally handicapped, that they just sit in a chair and drool all day. The human cannot feed itself or properly go to the bathroom. Any attempted communication consists of random incomprehensible screams and wails.
Physical disabilities? No.
Mental disabilities? Yes.
I find that people with with mental disabilities (particularly severe retardation cases such as anencephaly) are a problem to society. Because of their mental state, they are not beneficial to the world in the way of contributing something.
For comparison, a person with a physical disability (such as a missing arm or leg) can still contribute to the world via mental skills and abilities. A person with a severe mental disability that renders them incapable of even the most menial tasks cannot do anything; they are literally (I feel) just a parasitic drain on resources.
If an incapable being is completely unwanted by everyone and anything, is it immoral to consider its termination? Is it wrong to destroy such a thing just because it is alive? Think of it as this: Would you keep a cancerous tumour alive?
To put it bluntly I believe that beings that match what I have described above, should be terminated to maintain the integrity of society.
Note: I've got the feeling that my post is going to be flamed hard; therefore I have brought hot dogs and marshmallows :D
What if one were paralyzed from the neck down and had average intelligence (100IQ)? Of course Hawkings is beneficial and useful but what if someone were not that smart? Just because they have a conscious awareness that mentally retards don't does not make their brain a utility.
What if one were paralyzed from the neck down and had average intelligence (100IQ)? Of course Hawkings is beneficial and useful but what if someone were not that smart? Just because they have a conscious awareness that mentally retards don't does not make their brain a utility.
I find that there is a distinct difference between someone who is stupid and paralysed and someone who is mentally retarded. I believe that a mentally retarded being (depending on the severity of the retardation) cannot even measure up to a stupid person in terms of intellect or even personality.
To put it simply, I do not think a stupid paralysed person is even remotely similar to a retard in that they still have a life: they can still learn, communicate, share ideas, have goals and dreams, and generally still be a person (albeit restricted).
In what way is a fully paralyzed unintelligent person who cant do anything but remain (stupidly) consciously aware a benefit to society?
Share ideas??? I said they were stupid, rendering their ideas stupid. (Note: this is not the same as 'a psychopath can still be a genius' notion. I am talking pure idiocy.)
What if one were paralyzed from the neck down and had average intelligence (100IQ)? Of course Hawkings is beneficial and useful but what if someone were not that smart? Just because they have a conscious awareness that mentally retards don't does not make their brain a utility.
I presume, like always, you are valuing people based on their earning / inheritance-grabbing potential. This is not the value of a human being. A human being contributes to society by the relationships he makes. If someone falls in love with him he is of value to them. If his parents love him, he is of value to them.
So why aren't you disputing the guy who advocated for the extermination of the mentally handicapped? Your being partial.
I haven't even said to rid of the non-useful handicapped, I was simply arguing that, by his argument, a fully paralyzed idiot would fit under the same criteria of non-usefulness and therefore should be treated in the same manner.
But I do love how you ignored his point and went strait to my clarification on his opinion on the non-useful non-retards.
Judging from my time in Primary school many children with learning difficulties do not have boundaries that other children have. Therefore they tend to antagonize or even attack the other children unprovoked. It sounds harsh but it is the truth. I think because of this they need to be supervised and treated differently by adults and should not go to the same school children who don't have them. This doesn't count children with mild learn disabilities though.
