The Instigator
Chickenman
Pro (for)
Winning
12 Points
The Contender
soundman
Con (against)
Losing
6 Points

Repubican policy is affected more by Darwin that democratic policy is.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Pro Tied Con
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/9/2008 Category: Politics
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 950 times Debate No: 1574
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (6)

 

Chickenman

Pro

Although republicans say that they condemn Darwin, they are the biggest supporters of his survival of the fittest theory. Right-wingers say that their policies are highly influenced by the bible. If that were so, wouldn't we actually care for the sick and poor? Wouldn't we directly give them what they need instead of hoping that the money would some how trickle down?

If you feel that current conservative policy does what Jesus wanted use to do than I am ready to hear your argument.
soundman

Con

I don't see how you can say that the poor are not helped in this country, with all of the social programs in our system, not to mention all of the privately operated clothing and food drives, rescue missions, etc. Are there still poor people, yes. There always will be. The Bible says that. Now, should we all just give out all our money to everyone who needs it? No. Because the Bible also says that if a man doesn't work, a man doesn't eat. I work for a church that is in the downtown district of my city. We have people come to the door several times a day, every day asking for assistance in the form of food, money, clothing, etc. Some of them are legitimate needs, but many are not. Many are poor because of substance addictions, mental illness, and other problems. Some have no need at all, and are just looking for a quick buck. Am I saying the system is perfect, no. But I am saying that people try, are trying, and saying the conservative policy and the Republican Party are not providing for the poor and are silently supporting Darwinian theory is just not accurate.
Debate Round No. 1
Chickenman

Pro

First of all, lets start of with some stats fun. Did you know that the richest 400 Americans have as much money as the bottom 50% of our nation's citizens? That's 57 million households.
Less than one per cent of what the world spent every year on weapons was needed to put every child into school by the year 2000 and yet it didn't happen.
Did you know that 1 billion of the 2.2 billion children on Earth live in poverty? Are you telling me that we can't try to help all of these people because the bible says there will always be poor people? I thought we were supposed to try and do everything possible to help those less fortunate than us.

Darwin's theory is that the strong survive and the weak die out. Republican views of the situation are that the poor are poor because they are lazy. Millions in America work more than forty hours a weak just to put food on the table. Government control could easily solve the problem. Government is only corrupt and evil if that is the way we want it. It's a democracy for crying out loud!

If repubilcans really do care about the poor, why do they shoot down plans to help them? They tell people to support themeselves, but how do you do that at seven bucks an hour? You don't, and thats why people get sucked in by credit card debt. That's why people go uninsured and end up dying without health care.

I understand that poor will always exist, but is that a justification for not trying to do anything about it?
soundman

Con

Ok, I never said not to help, in fact, I said we should help, just realize that we cannot solve every problem. The 400 richest Americans have more money than 50% of the nation, OK. Great. They have earned money. This is not a huge hang-up gor me. Are all of them Republicans? No. Are most involved in some kind of chartiable giving, or relief funding, Yes. I'm not bothered by them having alot of money. I'm bothered by people using them as an excuse, "Well, they don't need all that. They should give it all away. It's not fair." Grow Up. Seriously. And while we are on the subject....check out this article from Snopes.com. Who wastes more money, Democrats, or Republicans?

HOUSE # 1:

A 20-room mansion (not including 8 bathrooms) heated by natural gas. Add on a pool (and a pool house) and a separate guest house all heated by gas. In ONE MONTH ALONE this mansion consumes more energy than the average American household in an ENTIRE YEAR. The average bill for electricity and
natural gas runs over $2,400.00 per month. In natural gas alone (which last time we checked was a fossil fuel), this property consumes more than 20 times the national average for an American home. This house is not in a northern or Midwestern "snow belt," either. It's in the South.

HOUSE # 2:

Designed by an architecture professor at a leading national university, this house incorporates every "green" feature current home construction can provide. The house contains only 4,000 square feet (4 bedrooms) and is nestled on arid high prairie in the American southwest. A central closet in the house holds geothermal heat pumps drawing ground water through pipes sunk 300 feet into the ground. The water (usually 67 degrees F.)
heats the house in winter and cools it in summer. The system uses no fossil fuels such as oil or natural gas, and it consumes 25% of the electricity required for a conventional heating/cooling system. Rainwater
from the roof is collected and funneled into a 25,000 gallon underground cistern. Wastewater from showers, sinks and toilets goes into underground purifying tanks and then into the cistern. The collected water then irrigates the land surrounding the house. Flowers and shrubs native to the area blend the property into the surrounding rural landscape.

HOUSE # 1 (20 room energy guzzling mansion) is outside of Nashville, Tennessee. It is the abode of that renowned environmentalist (and filmmaker) Al Gore.

HOUSE # 2 (model eco-friendly house) is on a ranch near Crawford, Texas. Also known as "the Texas White House," it is the private residence of the President of the United States, George W. Bush.

Have you ever stood in a welfare line? I debate this topic, not as a "Weathly Republican", but as a poor republican man. My family was on welfare for many years. There were years my dad grossed $12,000. For the whole year. My mom took care of the kids, my dad worked in construction, and we lived in Central Florida. In CFL, taxes are higher, cost of living is higher, gas is higher. And yet, with the help of welfare and WIC, my family of six survived several years of "poverty". Understand this about your stat fun, $22,000 is considered the poverty line in this country. You are "impoverished" if you make less than $22,000 in a fiscal year. We had a car, it ran good. We ate. We had fun, toys, etc. But we scraped by. You go stand in a welfare line. Families wear designer clothes, gold jewelry, drive BMW's, Lexus', Caddilac's, etc. They are "poor" by choice, because they do not control their spending. Or, they choose not to work. I have seen too many able-bodied people draw SSI just because they could. I help people, I am all for helping those who need it. But I will not waste my hard-earned money on someone who is not willing to take care of themselves.

One of the biggest things I see in life, in my job, is people are not willing to sacrifice. They want the "high-roller" lifestyle, on the tuna & ramen budget.

You say Republicans shoot down efforts to help people. No Child Left Behind provides vouchers for students to go to a private school, at reduced cost to the family. So a child gets a better education the family can afford. Who brought that up? HHMMMM...... Or reduced government. Most don't realize, the money you get from social security, welfare, wic, etc......these programs cost money. Money you pay in taxes. Elimenating, re-framing, or reducing eligibilty for these programs leaves more money in your check every week. You aren't getting free money. Someone, somewhere, is paying for every dime. Saying Republicans are working against people.......how much power do you really think we have?
Debate Round No. 2
Chickenman

Pro

First of all I'd like to say that the point of this debate is not to prove that Al Gore wastes energy. That has nothing to do with the topic of this debate. Second of all this debate is on the collective general policy of the republican party. On that note I will get into why republican policy reflects darwin's ideas.

To start off I will try and sumarize the current republican stand point. What is said to happen is that if the rich are let to themesleves that through their own generosity the money will some how trickle down to the poor.

What should be changed is the minimum wage. It has not gone up at the same rate as the CEO's have. In 1978 the average CEO made 35 times the average worker. In 2005 the CEO made 262 times what the average worker made. Why do you defend these people who make so much? I'm not saying take all of their money, just don't give them breaks.

Warren Buffet, the third richest man in the world, said he was taxed only 17%. His secretary who made $60,000 paid 30%. A progressive tax law is essential to our nation. A half of a percent tax increase on the top 1% would be enough to pay for universal health care.

This cannot happen though, because the 'fittest' of our country feel that the poor are where they belong. You stated that not all of the richest people are republicans, and that is true, but republican policy helps the rich and hurts the poor. I would have to say that the majority of those in poverty work their tails off. They do the jobs now one else wants to do and they are an essential part of our country. It is time for all of our citizens to be lifted out of poverty. A high minimum wage would allow all citizens the ability to truly obtain financial freedom.
soundman

Con

soundman forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by soundman 8 years ago
soundman
Wow, this is a really long time afterward to post this, but i felt the need. You talked about a high minimum wage. Think about this: everything you buy, you pay a wage. When you buy milk for example, you pay the farmer his wage, the truck driver his, the packager his, the grocer his. What happens when one of those gets more money? The price goes up..... Then you get.....INFLATION. If we raise the minimum wage universally, then universally prices will go up proportionally. What we need is not the government to tell us what to do, but good-hearted business owners (regardless of their partisianship) to pay their workers a fair wage. Private change. Not more Governmental red tape.
Posted by Daxitarian 9 years ago
Daxitarian
In a way Chickenman is right, but not in the way he thinks.

What fiscal conservatism and darwin have in common is that both free markets and evolution are unguided processes that produce interconnected-highly complex, ordered systems. But our perception of time hasn't evolved to where these two concepts, free markets and evolution, isn't easily intuited by most people. That's why conservatives can't seem to get evolution and liberals can't wrap their mind around free-markets, as exemplified by Chickenman's last comment:

"A high minimum wage would allow all citizens the ability to truly obtain financial freedom."

You don't understand the unintended consequences of price fixing and how it affects supply and demand.
Posted by soundman 9 years ago
soundman
Srry I missed the deadline for posting, school is crazy. The point IS that Al Gore is wasteful. You want to pin not helping the poor on Republicans......I would think that fiscally (not to mention evironmentally) it would be better for Al to shape up his household. And, Democrats enjoy the same tax breaks Republicans do. They aren't aimed at rich Republicans, but all rich people.
Posted by Jlconservative 9 years ago
Jlconservative
We care about the poor and weak, however we believe that god gives everyone on this planet a gift and the potential to give that gift it is peoples choice to use it or not, and if they do not it is our duty to help them yes but to baby them and carry them while they still live a life of laziness why should those that went and worked hard and used their gifts for the good of society have to carry those who did not. What you are suggesting is communistic and non-American, my advise to you is to go Russia with ideas like Universal health care and Universal wages these ideas are communism and an active part in the communistic lifestyle.
6 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 6 records.
Vote Placed by Chickenman 9 years ago
Chickenman
ChickenmansoundmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by soundman 9 years ago
soundman
ChickenmansoundmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Idontcare 9 years ago
Idontcare
ChickenmansoundmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Aagon 9 years ago
Aagon
ChickenmansoundmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by ThaPeople 9 years ago
ThaPeople
ChickenmansoundmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by olympianfootball73 9 years ago
olympianfootball73
ChickenmansoundmanTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30