The Instigator
Pro (for)
0 Points
The Contender
Con (against)
3 Points

The world is unjust?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/3/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 729 times Debate No: 55989
Debate Rounds (1)
Comments (5)
Votes (1)




In this world justice isn't fair. Many people who do bad deeds will be punished much more severely than people who have done similar wrongdoings. Another example of injustice is the variation of laws In different countries, for example in Iran the police arrested some young people who had a water gun fight in a park. In most of the world, we see that as injustice. The kids and young adults are doing it as a government protest, and unmarried young women and men are not allowed to do things together in that place.
Why is this world so unfair?


The proposed resolution is : The world is unjust?

Let me ask you: Is the world unfair?

Can you say that the world is unfair for those with innumerable freedoms as an American Citizen? Is the world unfair for people like you, who have access to boundless fountains of knowledge from a single electronic device, a computer? Is the world unfair to people who want to enjoy their lives, in whatever legal form they want to? I, Shadow-Dragon, an active chaser of freedom and happiness say no. The world is fair to many, even if some face difficulties.
The series of pictures show that there still is faith in humanity. The world cannot be considered unjust when there are so many selfless people who are privileged, and give to the less fortunate. That is the beauty of humanity.
The opposing side may bring up the fact that many are homeless or living in poverty, but since there are so many charities and ways people give back to their community, the world truly is a just place.

Now, let us dissect the resolution: "The world is unjust?"
I will split my argument into two main points that encompass the term, ""the world"": The people one meets, and the events one experiences.
When faced with the sight of others suffering, emotions are triggered and feelings are stimulated. These emotions drive the goodness inside of people to come out, and these feelings are shown through charities, donation, and selfless acts. {3} {4}

The fact that people care so much about others, especially people they don"t even know, shows that the world is just. The first section of my argument, the people on this Earth, shows that society as a whole makes attempts to make this world a more place. In fact, there are even governments that are focused on equality for all, socialism and communism. These governments may not be effective, but they are aimed towards making this world a better place.

The Events
Of course, I acknowledge that disasters and tragedies occur. But death is a part of life, and is inevitable. However, when mass death does occur, although the survivors are left grieving, many other countries come in to save them. My favourite examples are the way America and other countries rushed to Haiti"s aid when they were hit by that earthquake back in 2010. {1} The world was quick to react when Japan was struck by Tsunamis a while ago. {2}
To see all this selflessness and all this generosity, one can conclude that the world is indeed fair.


"Another example of injustice is the variation of laws In different countries,"

Well, of course; different countries have different laws. Why wouldn't a universal judicial system function in modern times?
[A1] There wouldn't be a set of rules that could encompass the ideals and beliefs of different nations and cultures without overlapping and discrepancy.
[A2] There would be no way to enforce laws across the globe.
[A3] Regions, like the Middle East, have laws that are based on religion. There are 2.18 billion Christians around the world, and even then, religions clash

" unmarried young women and men are not allowed to do things together in that place."

That statement by the opposition can be dealt with by looking at [A3]. The reason unmarried couples cannot 'do things' together is because unmarried couples don't have the same right as married couples do, and the religious-based law system in parts of the world- especcially the middle east- does not allow those kinds of relationships.

In conclusion, the world is not unjust. I have refuted the resolution: The world is unjust, and have given arguments and examples of how it is indeed fair. I mentioned the way countries help other countries on a large scale, and how everyday acts by civilians make this world a more just place to live. There are countless of selfless acts by many around the world, and even if people are born into tougher conditions, they are aided and helped by the rest of the world in an attempt to make everyone's - young or old, rich or poor, boy or girl,- life brighter and better every day.

Thank you.

- Shadow-Dragon -

Debate Round No. 1
5 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 5 records.
Posted by TheArgumentForX 2 years ago
Very impressive well done and good luck
Posted by Shadow-Dragon 2 years ago
Good luck to my opponent. I enjoyed the debate.

- Shadow-Dragon -
Posted by MetalheadWolfman 2 years ago
Lol he only put one round... wtf?
Posted by Shadow-Dragon 2 years ago
Interesting debate. Round two should be intense. Haha, Good Luck
Posted by MetalheadWolfman 2 years ago
I dunno how anyone could DISagree with you...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by bladerunner060 2 years ago
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 
Reasons for voting decision: This debate suffered from a 1 round structure and a short constructive from Pro. But since Pro set up this debate, there's not much sympathy from me about it. Con responded to Pro, and created an unrebutted constructive. Pro's short and weak round was not left standing. Arguments to Con. As always, happy to clarify this RFD.