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.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Identify Ally
Declare Enemy
Challenge to a Debate
Report This User

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS JimboR

Reward Points:87
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.
97%
Arguments:164
Debates:1
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

Shifting the burden of proof. You made a claim, demonstrate it or be prepared to have your claim dismissed out of hand. It's not up to anyone else to disprove.

1 point

I've already told you:

Or because it was incoherent babble. Don't present false dichotomies, it makes you sound like more an idiot than you are.

Perhaps I was wrong about that last part, you are just that much of an idiot.

1 point

All you selfish proabortion liberals care about is self.

Obviously not, since I'm a man it has no direct effect on me.

The government has the right to prevent murder

If it's legal it isn't murder.

I favor the forced sterilization of all proaborts over the age of 20

20? Why 20? So arbitrary. Apart from that fact it's immoral. I'm not even going to get into why forced sterilization is immoral, it should be self evident

If it isn't then you're a lost cause.

0 points

There's more rights than just the right to life you monotonous cretin. I bet you don't even have a solid foundation for morality with which to make these claims that you do. You won't have even thought about.

2 points

And avoid stepping on Ants, because they are alive as well. Don't swat flies. Don't take antibiotics, those bacteria are alive as well.

I'm afraid the argument based entirely on not ending a life applies to the above as well. It's the morals behind why the ending of a human life is wrong that need to be examined, not the ending of the life itself.

1 point

Except they might want to have children. You conflate believing in the right to abortion with the act itself. For instance I believe in the right to abortion, but being a man it's not a procedure I will ever have done.

There also not children. They are fetuses. It also wouldn't be murder were it legal, as it wouldn't be unlawful.

1 point

This from someone who thinks that pro abortion women should have their tubes removed? In what way is that not abusing someones rights?

JimboR(87) Clarified
1 point

May I ask why negative experience matters in this context but positive experience doesn't? In fact, can I ask why negative experience matters at all?

I assume you're referring to suffering. From my perspective the act is amoral, it has nothing to do with right or wrong.

JimboR(87) Clarified
1 point

If I was a Christian I would expect my God to expect me to save the drowning child. That's how I'd resolve such an issue and I wouldn't expect Christians to leave drowning children in the belief that it was God's will (not that I'm saying it has never happened).

As would I. That's why I don't believe that anyone can legitimately hold the view that seemingly evil acts are the will of God for the purpose of some adequately compensating good.

JimboR(87) Clarified
1 point

A reduction in suffering is a net positive effect on a conscious entity, as is an increase in pleasant experience. I feel a focus on merely one side: the negative side, wouldn't be conducive to a holistic view of the effects an action can have on conscious entities.

I feel it's an easier metric to work with, but it still isn't perfect, in the context of morality. For instance If i were to give a child a balloon, that would be a positive experience for them, but I wouldn't consider it to be a moral act. It's a nice thing to do, but moral? I'm not sure it is.

The same could be said of a film that lots of people enjoy. That's a lot of positive experiences, but again I wouldn't say the act of making the film is moral. It could work the other way, if lots of people disliked it I wouldn't consider it an immoral act.

I'm not even confident that suffering is a good metric to be honest. I do think it's less subjective though.


Winning Position: Moral Relativism

About Me


"I like to think I'm a good person. I've taken the time to fill out my profile so you all know."

Biographical Information
Gender: Male
Marital Status: Married
Political Party: Other
Country: United Kingdom
Religion: Atheist
Education: Some College

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