#debate topic

[c0d7ton]

Today’s topic of debate:

Is luck real?

[sohannabarberaesque]

Rather apropos Hallowe'en, is it not?

(And enough to suggest as a debate topic "Resolved: That the whole Scooby-Doo franchise is becoming hackneyed and predictable, and needs to take a breather.")

[ask-the-fab-hair]

Let's get serious and talk about one of the topics in our country today: Mutants.

What is my position?

What's the big deal? They're human. One gene difference is not unnatural or unusual. It's the difference in eye color or a food intolerance. It's simple adapting to a threat. Weapons have become strange and destructive so humans have too. It's evolution at its evolution in the modern era.

[caleb-debates]

I’m gonna start my blog off here, and welcome to anyone whom sees it.

I choose to believe in the Bible because it is a reliable collection of historical documents written by eyewitnesses during the lifetime of other eyewitness. They report on supernatural events which take place in fulfillment of specific prophecies and claim that their writings are divine rather than human in origin.

Furthermore the Bible is not something to be proven by science. The scientific method states that something needs to be observable, measurable, and repeatable. Which isn’t possible with history.

History on the other hand uses the evidentiary method. You ask about reliability of sources, corroboration of sources, and the internal and external evidence that supports these sources.

The God of the Bible is the Truth. John 14:6 Jesus said “I am the way the truth and the life no one comes before the father except through me”

The Gospel proclaims truth, that is written by God, through men, for man, and is the ultimate Authority to us. God sent his only son to die on that Cross for our us. Bearing the full wrath of God, Christ payed the penalty so that we don’t have to.

I believe in the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ. And the Bible is Gods word displayed to us.

[intp-musing]

Punishing Someone Because of a Mistake

Okay, this topic has been floating around in my head for a while now, but I’m really not sure how to go about it. Okay, so you know how police would shoot at a criminal on the run if they deem it necessary. Sometimes innocent people get caught in the cross fire by complete coincidence or an extreme accident.

Now people believe the officer who has accidentally shot a civilian must be punished, but how do you punish the officer? Should they be laid off to think about their actions (even though it was an accident)? Should they be forced to go without a gun until they pass the gun license test again(idk what the test is actually called)? Should they be held in jail for murder(again it was in fact an accident)?

What exactly should be the punishment?

People make mistakes, we’re only human after all, but I’m definitely not saying that the officer should go unpunished for their mistake. However, I personally can’t think of a proper punishment. An innocent life was endangered and it must carry consequences, but what exactly should that punishment be?

[blackpxwer]

Debate topic #1

“Black History is American History”

For those of you who are not American, do you agree with this statement or do you feel as though it excludes you, your experience and your heritage entirely?

For those of you who are American, do you agree with this statement and believe in it?

[mikheyev-soupboy]

Urban vs Rural?

Urban over rural discrimination is a thing, and is just as bad as class discrimination? Discuss.

How can being less educated be a reason for their discrimination if education was and is established by urban elites? Why do elites always live in urban areas? Was I just urban-elitest by assuming that education was established by urban-dwellers? Do I have internalized urban-elitism?