- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
The Palestinians have their anger directed at those who have been occupying them,
and that hasn't been the British for over 60 years. It's not the British manning check points and building separation walls throughout the West Bank. Yes the British Government
played a major part in causing the current situation, however they are not the
major factor in it's perpetuation. The Israeli government has the power to try
and make things right but unfortunately they choose not to.
For starters the question is slanted and being slanted is not a proper way
to start a debate. The responses to the question are generally slanted,
not the question itself.
Maybe you should have asked it like this:
"Who deserves more land in Israel/Palestine?" or
"Who deserves more land Israelis or Palestinians?".
I say Socialism because absolute freedom plus human nature could produce
some scary results. I think there would be far more potential for crime in a
society run by total Anarchy. I think humanity needs some kind of stucture.
I'm not saying that Anarchy produces crime, I'm saying who knows what it
would produce? What services would Anarchy produce? At the end of the
day it's whether I have food or availability of medical care that I'm really
concerned with. Would Anarchy be as reliable at provideing me with the
necessities of life? I think under Socialism we all have more oppertunity to
work together to produce what is needed to sustain life.
A fetus is not yet a child. It is the product of the woman's body despite it
being viable future offspring. And although males have a stake in this
creation of life they are not the ones who have to take the risks of bearing
children. Pregnancy is a very risky situation for women and I think the
pro-life camp takes this very lightly. Women are responsible for bringing
life into this world, however that responsibility falls into each and everyone
of their hands. Every woman should have the right to decide what's best
for her health. After all it's her body and not yours.
Here is an exchange from Sep 28th John Adler/Chris Myers debate for the 3rd Congressional District seat according to the Courier Post:
As to the top of the ticket, Adler said it was a blessing that Barack Obama has not been in Washington all that long, while John McCain was part of the longtime Senate status quo that allowed the current economic crisis to occur.
Myers countered that Obama has never made what he calls "a command decision," and that as a small-town mayor himself, he knows that Sarah Palin has the experience to be a heartbeat from the presidency.
At a time when even conservatives are publicly raising questions about Palin, Myers still firmly has pom poms in hand. So Myers continues to say he will be an independent voice in Washington, while he can't even manage to be an independent voice in New Jersey.
You wonder, can Chris Myers see Russia from his house too? Is Myers trying to say he has the experience to be Vice President since he has served as a small town mayor as well? Or maybe he's qualified to be Governor of PA because he can see Philadelphia on his way to work.
I'm pretty sure Myers has been targeting unafilliated voters with his mailers since I'm the
only one in my houusehold receiveing them. None of the registered Republicans in
my household have received them. Further more his mailers fail to mention that he's
even a Republican. They just state that he's an "Indepedant voice".
Who does Myers think he's kidding?