Total Posts:33|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Have some debates been settled?

Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:00:20 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
There are virtually no more debates on gay marriage or evolution. Is it now fair to say that both of these debates have been reasonably settled (i.e., everyone now admits that speciation has occurred, and gays should be allowed to get married)? Or, would that be presumptuous?
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:02:43 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
I believe that gay marriage should be accepted.

I believe that evolution is true; however, I am open to other theories.

I enjoy learning about Social Darwinism.

I would not have accepted either of these years ago. I thank this community for opening my mind.
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:03:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Everyone's just tired of debating them I think. Those who are against gay marriage are either religious and conservative (coughignorantcough) or against marriage benefits alltogether (my stance). Eh, I might be against marriage benefits but I think gays should be able to be legally "married" or declare themselves as such if that 'right' is extended to straight people. Also, the evidence for evolution is so profoundly in Pro's favor that it'd be kind of humorous to see someone take Con; I'm glad this hasn't been debate in awhile. Hopefully even the religious can reconcile evolution with God somehow.
President of DDO
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:05:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 3:03:44 PM, theLwerd wrote:
Everyone's just tired of debating them I think. Those who are against gay marriage are either religious and conservative (coughignorantcough) or against marriage benefits alltogether (my stance). Eh, I might be against marriage benefits but I think gays should be able to be legally "married" or declare themselves as such if that 'right' is extended to straight people. Also, the evidence for evolution is so profoundly in Pro's favor that it'd be kind of humorous to see someone take Con; I'm glad this hasn't been debate in awhile. Hopefully even the religious can reconcile evolution with God somehow.

Omg, I'm against marriage benefits too!
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:05:14 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 3:02:43 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I believe that gay marriage should be accepted.

I believe that evolution is true; however, I am open to other theories.

I enjoy learning about a worthless, silly, and morally repugnant pursuit.

I would not have accepted either of these years ago. I thank this community for opening my mind.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
belle
Posts: 4,113
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:07:05 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 3:00:20 PM, Freeman wrote:
There are virtually no more debates on gay marriage or evolution. Is it now fair to say that both of these debates have been reasonably settled (i.e., everyone now admits that speciation has occurred, and gays should be allowed to get married)? Or, would that be presumptuous?

honestly, i doubt minds have been changed so much as people are just tired of getting their arses handed to them in debate :P

there are still something like 2000 members who are con gay marriage, but i am not sure how many of those are con for libertarian, rather than discriminatory, reasons.
evidently i only come to ddo to avoid doing homework...
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:07:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 3:05:14 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:02:43 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I believe that gay marriage should be accepted.

I believe that evolution is true; however, I am open to other theories.

I enjoy learning about a worthless, silly, and morally repugnant pursuit.

I would not have accepted either of these years ago. I thank this community for opening my mind.

I'm not saying I believe in Social Darwinism, but I love learning about it.
BigMac
Posts: 1,155
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:48:56 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
Everyone on DDO is relatively intelligent (with a few exceptions) and thus, we do not go around yelling REPENT HOMOSEXUALS FOR YOU WILL BURN IN HE||. We respect people (unless you piss someone off...).

Plus, (once again, for the most part) we all are intelligent enough to see evolution as mostly if not entirely true.

(not to mention, you really don't want to incur the wrath of the amount of people who will attack you if you challenge either of those.)
I'm back.
studentathletechristian8
Posts: 5,810
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:51:35 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 3:48:56 PM, BigMac wrote:
Everyone on DDO is relatively intelligent (with a few exceptions) and thus, we do not go around yelling REPENT HOMOSEXUALS FOR YOU WILL BURN IN HE||. We respect people (unless you piss someone off...).

Plus, (once again, for the most part) we all are intelligent enough to see evolution as mostly if not entirely true.

(not to mention, you really don't want to incur the wrath of the amount of people who will attack you if you challenge either of those.)

Freeman, Geo, Puck, etc ...
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:57:47 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 3:05:14 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:02:43 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I enjoy learning about a worthless, silly, and morally repugnant pursuit.

You're not a very good libertarian...
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 3:59:55 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 3:57:47 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:05:14 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:02:43 PM, studentathletechristian8 wrote:
I enjoy learning about a worthless, silly, and morally repugnant pursuit.

You're not a very good libertarian...

lol, how's that?
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Danielle
Posts: 21,330
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:04:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:02:31 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:59:55 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
lol, how's that?

The strong survive, the weak die. Et cetera.

Misconception. Darwinism =/= the storng survive. It's the ones who are MOST ADAPTABLE TO CHANGE that survive according to Darwinism.
President of DDO
Freeman
Posts: 1,239
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:05:39 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:02:31 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:59:55 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
lol, how's that?

The strong survive, the weak die. Et cetera.

You guys (libertarians) just want to replace public tyrannies with private ones.
Chancellor of Propaganda and Foreign Relations in the Franklin administration.

"I intend to live forever. So far, so good." -- Steven Wright
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:09:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:02:31 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:59:55 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
lol, how's that?

The strong survive, the weak die. Et cetera.

Social Darwinism is saying that THAT is a morally important process.

I understand that some Social Darwinists might, for that reason, BE libertarians...

BUT that's not the only reason for being Libertarian... and it's not why I am (though granted, I'm not a, so called, PURE libertarian)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:12:30 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:09:33 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:02:31 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:59:55 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
lol, how's that?

The strong survive, the weak die. Et cetera.

Social Darwinism is saying that THAT is a morally important process.

I understand that some Social Darwinists might, for that reason, BE libertarians...

BUT that's not the only reason for being Libertarian... and it's not why I am (though granted, I'm not a, so called, PURE libertarian)

I'm as libertarian as I am because I would respect people as people... regardless of who's "most fit"...
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
GeoLaureate8
Posts: 12,252
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:14:10 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:05:39 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:02:31 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:59:55 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
lol, how's that?

The strong survive, the weak die. Et cetera.

You guys (libertarians) just want to replace public tyrannies with private ones.

Exactly. That's what I find ironic about the DDO Libertarians.
"We must raise the standard of the Old, free, decentralized, and strictly limited Republic."
-- Murray Rothbard

"The worst thing that can happen to a good cause is, not to be skillfully attacked, but to be ineptly defended."
-- Frederic Bastiat
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:15:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:04:53 PM, theLwerd wrote:
Misconception. Darwinism =/= the storng survive. It's the ones who are MOST ADAPTABLE TO CHANGE that survive according to Darwinism.

Haha, I know. It's kind of a joke. Libertarians are often called Social Darwinists as an ad hominem.

At 5/17/2010 4:05:39 PM, Freeman wrote:
You guys (libertarians) just want to replace public tyrannies with private ones.

No. Maybe Rezz or Rag, but not me.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:16:21 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:05:39 PM, Freeman wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:02:31 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 3:59:55 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
lol, how's that?

The strong survive, the weak die. Et cetera.

You guys (libertarians) just want to replace public tyrannies with private ones.

like how???
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:25:26 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:21:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
Freeman, you opt into private tyrannies. Supposedly.

and then....how's it a tyranny?? it's an agreement.

However... I'd say that property "rights" break down when people are in dire need... so I'd be for Taxing (stealing) for those who are in dire need. (food, shelter, even education :)
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:26:17 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:25:26 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
shelter

at least for kids.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:27:42 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:21:29 PM, theLwerd wrote:
Freeman, you opt into private tyrannies. Supposedly.

Eh. Not really. Tyrannies are governments of single rulers with absolute power. I get what you're saying though.

I believe in the existence of a single state with a monopoly on [violence], though. The state would have a few functions. I'm a consequentialist libertarian, or classical liberal. I don't go as far as Ragz or Rezz.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:29:44 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
also... I'm for stealing to support a court system :) at least for those who can't pay for it
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:31:03 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
though I'd say guilty parties ought to pay/work off as much for the expenses involved as feasible...
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:32:01 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:25:26 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
However... I'd say that property "rights" break down when people are in dire need... so I'd be for Taxing (stealing) for those who are in dire need. (food, shelter, even education :)

Subsidizing failure. Nice.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:33:33 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:32:01 PM, Nags wrote:
I'm a social darwinist.

Apparently.
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:34:53 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:33:33 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:32:01 PM, Nags wrote:
I'm a social darwinist.

Apparently.

At 5/17/2010 4:15:44 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:04:53 PM, theLwerd wrote:
Misconception. Darwinism =/= the storng survive. It's the ones who are MOST ADAPTABLE TO CHANGE that survive according to Darwinism.

Haha, I know. It's kind of a joke. Libertarians are often called Social Darwinists as an ad hominem.

So completely necessary.
mattrodstrom
Posts: 12,028
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:36:09 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:32:01 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:32:01 PM, Nags wrote:
I'm a social darwinist.
.. or just an uncaring jerk... but you know... the two are kinda related...
"He who does not know how to put his will into things at least puts a meaning into them: that is, he believes there is a will in them already."

Metaphysics:
"The science.. which deals with the fundamental errors of mankind - but as if they were the fundamental truths."
Xer
Posts: 7,776
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/17/2010 4:43:40 PM
Posted: 6 years ago
At 5/17/2010 4:36:09 PM, mattrodstrom wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:32:01 PM, Nags wrote:
At 5/17/2010 4:32:01 PM, Nags wrote:
I'm a social darwinist.
.. or just an uncaring jerk... but you know... the two are kinda related...

Mhm. Don't you just love when people point guns at your head and tell you to care for someone? It's just so... caring.