- 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.
Look, rape is against your will. You are choosing to read what they say and responding to it. That's NOT rape. They may be a jerk, they may say mean things, but calling anyone a rapist (albeit verbal) when it clearly isn't rape is disingenuous to the victims of the actual act and the equivalent of a false accusation.
If you don't like them, ban them, don't read what they say and don't give them attention by going to a completely different forum and making a debate about them.
Both parties have. From the pettiness of the President to the lunacy and fervor of the Dems and Republicans. Honestly I think we should just fire the whole lot of them, re-establish a third party and shorten/limit terms. Like or dislike Warren Buffett, his remark on passing a law that says anytime there is a deficit of more than 3 percent, all sitting members of Congress are ineligible for re-election, is pretty spot on.
Ahh that's unfortunate then. I really don't know enough about it so thank you for explaining. It's amazing how some people who voted to leave really only did so because of advertisements. Voting on something that seems to be so important should have been met with more in depth detail of the situation.
Do I support vigilantism? No. Do I feel bad if a proven child molester is killed? Also no.
It's imperative that we as a society don't feel we have the right to resort to vigilantism when we feel slighted over something, however I can't in all honesty say I find fault with a parent seeking vengeance against a person who beyond a shadow of a doubt, harmed/molested/killed a child. Sometimes sex offenders get more freedom than they deserve when their victim suffers for life.