- 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.
I understand that girls can choose the healthy alternative vegetarianism, but for guys it wouldn't be a great idea. Proteins is mostly in all sorts of meat, which is essential for building and maintaining muscles. That's why I choose steaks, but I would love to date a girl that only ate veggies, as I would imagine that she would pretty fit.
It has actually nothing to do with god as such. Instead, it was a symbol of faith in both the Civil War in The United States and also during the 1950s when the United States experienced The Cold War with The Soviet Union. The Soviet Union was officially atheist, which The United States wanted to emphasize with the notion of godless communism. In order to do so, Congress passed a resolution in 1955 that the motto should be extended from nickels to paper money. The intention of it was to signify that the people of The United States believed in something, while people from The Soviet Union did not believe in anything. Some would argue that it was a link in the propaganda process of making The Soviet Union alien to The United States population, in order to make The United States more liberal than it already was.
Someone once said: "The love of religion is the root of all evil. Try to imagine a world without religion. Who in this world would point out the existence of evil? They'd call it a mistake, undesirable, unworkable, they'd seek to find better alternatives, but without a religion they could not call it evil and condemn it for eternity.", which I found suiting for this debate. It truly captures why religion is the source of many (if not all) tensions that the world deals with and has dealt with for the last couple of centuries.
However, I see why people need to believe in something. Kirkegaard, a Danish existentialist philosopher, described it well. His argument was that faith in a higher power was needed for human beings, when life had treated them in a way that had crushed them (e.g. 'a son was ripped away in a brutal school-shooting' or 'a mom that dies while giving birth to her first baby'). At that time, it is necessary to have faith in something supernatural that is bigger than oneself, in order to grasp the pain that one feels. So, I think faith is an important part of human life, but I do not feel strongly about more established religions that want to dictate what humans should and should not do.
A truly capitalistic system only benefits the wealthy, because the people who runs and have stakes in cooperations and political institutions only looks out for their own interests. We have seen numerous examples of this, where the latest, is a story that concluded that the richest people have billions after billions in foreign accounts on the grounds that they do not have to pay taxes from these amounts. However, the people who owns the billions, normally grew up in states where they benefitted from the community of the state. Therefore, it would be only natural that they gave something back to those, who helped them become succesful.
This argument is also in concert with the argument about globalization. There is no such thing as being loyal and proud of ones own state anymore, as people see themselves as people of the world. This results in that everyone who have means, choose to entertain themselves internationally and as all scholars from studies such as International Studies and International Relations will inform you the international system is basically anarchic. People can do as they please, because there unfortunately is not a international regime or organization that have the power to enforce laws internationally yet. Therefore, I will not support capitalism, even though the idea is great if you perceive it nationally.