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 addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!

Report This User
Permanent Delete

View All

View All

View All

RSS Ddjxie

Reward Points:58
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.
Efficiency Monitor

10 most recent arguments.
4 points

"A woman who has a baby in her stomach does not have the right to kill it before it is born because it is her own dang fault!"

I would like to point out that a woman who has a "baby" in her stomach is already in the process of digesting it though the stomach's protein-digesting enzymes and strong acids.

2 points

"killing a baby is killing an innocent life. Why? well first of all, you don't give the baby a chance to live."

If you don't give the "baby" a chance to live, then how can there be a life to kill?

1 point

I propose a point system to upvote/downvote debates based on their seriousness, originality, controversy, etc., and give more attention to the ones with higher upvotes.

2 points

Since 2 is defined as 1 + 1 (at least in base 3 and above), 2 != 1. If 1 = 2, then mathematics would fall apart because everything would equal everything else. Example: 666 = 1337 (which may or may not be true ;) ).


Proof by contradiction:

1 = 2

1 + 1 = 2 + 1

2 = 3

Since 1 = 2,

1 = 2 = 3



1 = 2

1 + 1 + 1 = 2 + 1 + 1

3 = 4

Since 1 = 2 and 2 = 3,

1 = 2 = 3 = 4

and so on.


You can also go in the negative direction:

1 = 2

1 - 1 = 2 - 1

0 = 1


However, 0 is defined as 0 + x = x and 1 is defined as 1x = x by the existence of 0 and 1 axiom. Therefore, if you try to substitute 0 for 1 or 1 for 0, you get contradictions: 1 + x = x and 0x = x. Since an axiom cannot and must not be contradicted, 1 != 2.

3 points

"Look at the British Colonial empire — the most magnificent empire that the world ever saw. The old Spanish boast that the sun never set in their dominions, has been more truly realised amongst ourselves." - Sir Henry Ward, 1839

Supporting Evidence: Map of the British Empire (
1 point

You cannot assume the universe will collapse upon itself again into a singularity. Current understanding of the universe dictates that the universe will expand indefinitely, causing the density of matter and energy to asymptotically approach zero, hence the death of the universe.

Your theory lacks a mechanism to cause the universe to contract after the aforementioned period of expansion. Scientists have already concluded that the force of gravity has been overcome by the mysterious force accelerating the expansion of the universe, which had led to the general acceptance that our universe will die a cold and dark death.

2 points

"America" is not the original name used to refer to the political region that lies between the Dominion of Canada and the United Mexican States; its original name is the "United States of America".

3 points

Britain is a region within the United Kingdom.

Example: England --> Britain (England + Wales)--> Great Britain (England + Wales + Scotland)--> United Kingdom (England + Wales + Scotland + Northern Ireland)

2 points

Keep them imprisoned in a dark room with a very comfortable couch and a large TV with 5.1 surround sound constantly playing Fox News and the worst of American Idol, while only feeding them McDonald's menu foods multiple times a day.

2 points

'God' is a concept, authority and/or symbol conceived by humans to explain extraordinary events, to unite and control people to work towards common goals, and/or to act as the perfect role-model whose qualities and/or actions are to be duplicated to the best of the abilities of the worshipping practitioner.

God(s) is/are everywhere and nowhere as the idea of him/her/it/them is/are ingrained in the human mind, yet nonexistent in the natural world. The average human being will not be able to interact directly with (a) God with absolute certainty that what he/she is 'interacting' with is actually God; instead, most humans must place faith in the words of a minority who truly believe they can interact directly with God.

The idea of God(s) is fed and reinforced perpetually by various cultural forces and the inability of individuals to comprehend bizarre, marvelous and/or inconceivable phenomena on a regular basis. However, as science has progressed evermore to explain a staggering number of natural phenomena, especially those once classified as 'miracles', human belief in God has been dwindling increasingly.

Ultimately, no one can be certain of what God truly is because, like the ideas in a novel, there can be many interpretations of the same ideas that were devised by other fellow humans. Unless humans today are able to interrogate the many people who originally spread the various ideas of 'God', we may never know what each of the hundreds of known Gods truly are.

Displaying 9 most recent debates.

Winning Position: DNA
Winning Position: Yes, demand more from reps
Winning Position: No
Winning Position: Yes, it's morally wrong

About Me

Biographical Information
Gender: Male
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Other
Country: Canada
Religion: Atheist
Education: In College

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