CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


Twitter
Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Amb_Arrogant

Reward Points:4
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
100%
Arguments:4
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
4 most recent arguments.
1 point

I do not believe the constitution allows for heavy gun regulations for multiple reasons. The wording in the amendment itself explicitly states that the "right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." This line in the 2nd amendment directly protects the peoples rights to bear firearms. Not only do I believe that heavy regulation infringes on the 2nd amendment but I also believe you are taking away a peoples right to protect themselves. The constitution is outdated and was written in a time well before firearms were mass produced and anybody could get one legitimately or not. People have the right to protect themselves. This was found in the 2008 case D.C v Heller that the 2nd amendment indeed protects an individuals right to own a gun for purposes outside of service or militia, which includes defending themselves in their home.

1 point

I understand your viewpoint of the value of life and its future potential but that thanks to abortion crime rates have plummeted. These possible kids that parents do not want would have grown up mostly in broken homes, unloved, or in the foster care system, abandoned and suffering. These kids have potential but in the childcare system we have, their future is not cultivated. Also you said 135 thousand children are adopted each year, 400 thousand are put into the system. That is a horrible ratio. Not only is the adoption rate awful but the effect these forced children have on the parents is terrible. The mother has to deal with the physical and mental burden of having a child that I'm pretty sure any male will never understand. You supporting the abortion ban is you supporting the forced pregnancies that lead to mental trauma and physical tolls, the financial burden that the mothers might not be able to carry, and the sacrificing of time to raise a kid, or hey, she deals with the fact she has to give birth to this kid because people said "oh but the kid could cure cancer". Statistically and way more likely, the kid will become a criminal, not a productive member of society. That kid is going to grow up knowing they were put up for adoption and know they were unwanted. The mental toll is so great for the kid and the parents and that is horrible to force onto somebody.

4 points

I believe abortion should be legal. I believe abortion should be legal because putting a law that prohibits women from preventing negative impacts on their lives takes away their inalienable rights of life, liberty and pursuit of happiness. Banning abortion takes away their inalienable rights.

1 point

Although taco bell tastes better and probably uses something closer to real meat which means a slightly more organic dive, I would rather swim in a McDonald's dumpster. This is because Taco bell has a lot more spices and sauces and that is not fun man. I do not want to swim in a dumpster full of meat and spices because that would probably burn my nips. The actual pain that could put you in would be immense. My second reason as ambassador of arrogance is that the sheer load of ingredients in a taco bell dumpster is crazy. There would be a symphony of smells and the amount of meats, breads, sauces and veggies would super cede the ingredients of "chicken", "meat" and bread in a McDonald's dumpster. Just because the meat is organic or more real at taco bell does not mean its good. That means it will break down quicker, and attract more animals and bugs than McDonald's which is probably not real meat and therefore wont attract as many other creepy creatures lurking in the dump.

Amb_Arrogant has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here