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 Augustus

Reward Points:3
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.
86%
Arguments:3
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
3 most recent arguments.
1 point

I don't respect anyone who engages in activities that threaten or take the lives of others for the sake of silly fanaticism.

3 points

There is no reason for why women can't be priests other than blatant sexism. All duties that are performed by male priests can be performed by female ones.

1 point

Before I begin I will start with an observation: The affirmative of this question needs to argue that tobacco should be illegal, but the negative can still support regulations while upholding tobacco's legality.

Points:

-The fact that an item may be a risk to one's health does not mean it should be illegal. Cars kill thousands every years and are quite dangerous but still retain their legality. The government can regulate traffic laws to make cars safer without unnecessarily outlawing them. Likewise, there can be designated areas for smokers this way no one else has to intake their smoke.

-Restricting freedom in the name of safety is bad. Just because something is dangerous doesn't mean the government has the right to regulate our lives and protect us from it. Give me liberty or give me death. I do not want a body to tell me what I can and cannot do. For an example to put things into perspective: does the government have the right to listen into our phone calls, follow us, or interrogate us in the name of counter terrorism? The idea that the governing body can restrict our freedoms in the name of safety or the general welfare of society permits the restriction of freedom.

Augustus 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