|
Post by johnsapphire on Nov 16, 2006 20:37:02 GMT -5
It's been abolished, you--
*ahem*
Ignorant one.
I would like a debate on whether...
1) Intelligent design is viable science and 2) If it should be taught in schools.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2006 12:39:40 GMT -5
it is you who argue from ignorance my friend. Britain has the death penalty. America does not
|
|
|
Post by Denithar on Nov 17, 2006 13:10:11 GMT -5
My state of residence, Minnesota, does not currently have the death penalty. But Colorado, my former state of residence, still has the death penalty. So you're not quite wrong, but definitely not correct either.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 17, 2006 15:21:27 GMT -5
Have to read carefully den America does not have the death penalty. If it did, then it would be a law for all states to have it. I believe it is under half of the states (19 rings a bell) that have the death penalty
|
|
|
Post by johnsapphire on Nov 17, 2006 20:18:45 GMT -5
Texas executes over 200 people a year. Arkansas, the closest runner up, executes about forty. Damn south.
|
|
Spinner
Rank 2 (STILL a Newbie)
Posts: 223
|
Post by Spinner on Nov 17, 2006 21:47:06 GMT -5
Can I request a debate on religion... If allowed, can we have it tackle (either some or all)...
1.)Does God exist? 2.)Is there "A" god at least? 3.)If such a being does, does he have to be omnibenevolent, omniscient, omnipotent, none, all, or just one or two? 4.)Are there more advantages to religion then there are disadvantages? Should we abandon it all together?
|
|
|
Post by johnsapphire on Nov 18, 2006 14:31:37 GMT -5
I would like to refine Haydn's debate premise slightly to the following points:
1) Does God exist? If he does, did he pop out of nothing, or has he always existed? 2) Should ancient scripture be able to trump modern science, since the ancient priests had no knowledge of Heliocentrism, radiocarbon dating, etc.? 3) Should we tolerate martyrdom in religion, seeing as it is a serious threat to the global community? 4) Does scripture provide the supreme moral code? Does atheism imply a lack of morals? Are atheists/agnostics more violent than religious believers because of their lack of faith? 5) Why do people have faith and/or join organized religion? Are faith and organized religion necessarily good? Have we seen them improve society? 6) Should intelligent design be taught in schools as viable pseudoscience?
Modifications?
|
|
|
Post by Denithar on Nov 18, 2006 14:34:04 GMT -5
Almost all those modifications are both an issue and an answer. You don't begin a debate with the supposdely correct answer already stated.
|
|
|
Post by johnsapphire on Nov 18, 2006 15:10:59 GMT -5
Well Den, modify each point so it looks to YOU objective.
|
|
|
Post by Denithar on Nov 18, 2006 15:13:53 GMT -5
Gil, why did you modify my post? I don't appreciate that. Especially since you made it look like I'd spell "supposedly" as "supposdely".
|
|
|
Post by johnsapphire on Nov 18, 2006 15:40:36 GMT -5
Well Den, modify each point so it looks to YOU objective. ^What he said.
|
|
Spinner
Rank 2 (STILL a Newbie)
Posts: 223
|
Post by Spinner on Nov 18, 2006 19:04:59 GMT -5
I would like to refine Haydn's debate premise slightly to the following points: 1) Does God exist? If he does, did he pop out of nothing, or has he always existed? 2) Should ancient scripture be able to trump modern science, since the ancient priests had no knowledge of Heliocentrism, radiocarbon dating, etc.? 3) Should we tolerate martyrdom in religion, seeing as it is a serious threat to the global community? 4) Does scripture provide the supreme moral code? Does atheism imply a lack of morals? Are atheists/agnostics more violent than religious believers because of their lack of faith? 5) Why do people have faith and/or join organized religion? Are faith and organized religion necessarily good? Have we seen them improve society? 6) Should intelligent design be taught in schools as viable pseudoscience? Modifications? I like that... I like question no. 3. But I would like to scratch out the first question. If he just "popped"(I love that word) out of nothing, he cannot possibly be "God"; at least in the philosophical definition of god. That is of course unless we are considering a god (which in philosophy, would simply be called "being") as the product of an eternal reality and simply the creator of humanity rather than the entire universe.(we cannot unassume that god did not create at least man since it would lose the point of discussing him in the first place). and as for no.5 as my brother wouldsay... slave morality...lol anyway, that's what I think.... grammar
|
|
|
Post by Gil Alexander on Nov 18, 2006 23:16:23 GMT -5
Gil, why did you modify my post? I don't appreciate that. Especially since you made it look like I'd spell "supposedly" as "supposdely". The only thing I did was take out the first sentence you wrote, which I thought was unnessecarily rude. I changed nothing else in your post.
|
|
|
Post by johnsapphire on Nov 18, 2006 23:39:24 GMT -5
Den, can you PM me the "unnecessecarily" rude first sentence? Also, Haydn, save your arguements for the debate. This is just for requests.
PS. I love Haydn. Franz Joseph, that is.
|
|
Spinner
Rank 2 (STILL a Newbie)
Posts: 223
|
Post by Spinner on Nov 19, 2006 17:46:02 GMT -5
okay2x....I'm getting worked up.. there's actually a person named haydn?? I just picked the name up from an anime..lol.."law of ueki"
|
|