<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Debate.org: Popular Debates</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=1&amp;sort=</link>
<description>Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>2013-05-20T09:03:08-08:00</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>2013-05-20T09:03:08-08:00</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<title>I am more random than you</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/I-am-more-random-than-you/2/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) Thank you for accepting my debate. You may begin, but in round 4 just put &quot;no argument will be posted here, as agreed&quot; instead of an actual round. This debate is solely based off who can be more random.

 Rules:

 1) Please keep it moderately clean.

 2) You may only have 1 paragraph of randomness.. ( 5 sentences max)</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/I-am-more-random-than-you/2/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:48:44-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Minimum Wage Is Not Beneficial to Society</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Minimum-Wage-Is-Not-Beneficial-to-Society/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;div&gt;You're the best&amp;nbsp;debater&amp;nbsp;who has asked to debate this.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-decoration: underline;&quot;&gt; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Full Resolution&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Minimum Wage Is Not Beneficial to Society&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;BoP is shared. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Definitions&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Minimum Wage: &quot;The smallest hourly wage that an employee may be paid as mandated by federal law.&quot;[1]&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Beneficial: &quot;Producing or promoting a favorable result; advantageous.&quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Society: &quot;A community, nation, or broad grouping of people having common traditions, institutions, and collective activities and interests.&quot;[3]&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rules&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1. The first round is for acceptance.&lt;br /&gt; 2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed. &lt;br /&gt; 3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering. &lt;br /&gt; 4. All arguments must be visible inside this debate. Sources may be posted in an outside link. &lt;br /&gt; 5. Debate re</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Minimum-Wage-Is-Not-Beneficial-to-Society/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T22:31:44-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Overregulation Was a Significant Cause for the Fall of the Roman Empire</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Overregulation-Was-a-Significant-Cause-for-the-Fall-of-the-Roman-Empire/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;div&gt;I have challenged TheHitchslap to this debate to see if he would like to defend his comment on this debate. &lt;strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Full Resolution&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Excessive regulation of the economy was a significant contributor&amp;nbsp;to the fall of the Western Roman Empire.&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Definitions&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Economic Regulation: &quot;The use of legislative measures&amp;nbsp;and government&amp;nbsp;regulations&amp;nbsp;to affect economic outcomes. This can extend from forms of&amp;nbsp;government that control and regulate all aspects of economics&amp;nbsp;to measures which are enacted to address&amp;nbsp;particular issues such as deregulation&amp;nbsp;of industries&amp;nbsp;or measures intended to address various economic&amp;nbsp;factors.&quot;[1] This includes taxation and spending.&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Signficant: &quot;Important; of consequence.&quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Cause: &quot;The producer of an effect.&quot;[3]&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Fall of the Western Roman Empire: The&amp;nbsp;de</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Overregulation-Was-a-Significant-Cause-for-the-Fall-of-the-Roman-Empire/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T19:57:56-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Is 69 and 420 funny??</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-69-and-420-funny/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) 69 is a sex position. 420 is a number that is code for smoking weed. both of thise things are pretty funny i thiink. sometimes i see these numbers as i go about my day and can't help but laught at them. but some people think that they aren't that funny?? please answer 

- austin</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-69-and-420-funny/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T03:53:53-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The US Should Have Better Gun Control</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-US-Should-Have-Better-Gun-Control/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) I believe that the lack of gun control in the Unites States is a serious danger to the public, in nations with full gun control the homicide rate, armed robbery rate, and suicide rates are much lower.

First Round is for acceptance

Second Round is for initial arguments &amp; rebuttals

Third Round is for further arguments &amp; rebuttals

Fourth Round is final rebuttals &amp; concluding statements only, no new arguments</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-US-Should-Have-Better-Gun-Control/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T23:13:42-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The consumption of meat is ethically wrong</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-consumption-of-meat-is-ethically-wrong/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;Greetings Valladarex,&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Here is the debate!&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;div&gt;Ethics: &lt;span&gt;normatively to refer to a code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational persons.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Outlines:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;- First round acceptance, just so I can outline everything (you can briefly outline your arguments if you want to).&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;- 4 rounds because of the outlining in the first.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;- No new arguments in the last round.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;- The burden of proof is 100% with me.&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;- Prepare to have your arguments demolished&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Good luck!&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-consumption-of-meat-is-ethically-wrong/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-15T20:20:40-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Being a Fatty is Worse than Being a Ginger</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Being-a-Fatty-is-Worse-than-Being-a-Ginger/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;BRING. IT. ON. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I purposely challenged MassiveDump seeing that not only is he the most famous ginger on DDO but he would know what being a ginger is like more than most of us! &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;This is a troll debate! &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telling the truth is not required, but let's at least try to make it relative to being fat or being a ginger. No going, &quot;EMEMGERD FAT PEOPLE ARE FLYING ALIENSFRFROM MARZ THEREFORE THEY ARE BETTER.&quot; Or anything like that! Let's keep it real bro. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Innapropriate language is also allowed! &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First round is for acceptance.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Note to all viewers: this debate may be found offensive, especially to fat people and gingers. Viewer discretion is adviced. And don't say I didn't warn you. &lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Being-a-Fatty-is-Worse-than-Being-a-Ginger/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-17T21:38:09-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument is Sound - 2</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Leibnizian-Cosmological-Argument-is-Sound-2/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Resolved:&lt;/strong&gt;&amp;nbsp;The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument is Sound.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Rounds:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1. Presentation of the LCA/Initial Refutation&lt;br /&gt;2. Clash&lt;br /&gt;3. Weighing/Clash&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;No new arguments should be presented in round 3 unless in direct response to a new argument presented in round 2.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;God is defined as the&amp;nbsp;&lt;em&gt;necessary, personal first cause&lt;/em&gt;&amp;nbsp;of the universe.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;We should rationally accept an argument as sound if the affirmation of its premises is more plausible than the negation.&lt;strong&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/div&gt;
&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Every existing thing has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or in an external cause.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;If the universe has an explanation of its existence, that explanation is God.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;The universe is an existing thing.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Therefore the explanation of the uni</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Leibnizian-Cosmological-Argument-is-Sound-2/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-16T01:25:43-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Resolved: North Korea and South Korea should just have sex and get it over with already</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-North-Korea-and-South-Korea-should-just-have-sex-and-get-it-over-with-already/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) The debate resolution is that North Korea and South Korea should just have sex and get it over with already. 

THIS IS A TROLL DEBATE

1st round acceptance only
4000 character limit
Can now be accepted</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-North-Korea-and-South-Korea-should-just-have-sex-and-get-it-over-with-already/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-11T17:13:27-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>My Life Sucks More Than My Opponent's</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/My-Life-Sucks-More-Than-My-Opponents/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;My motion is that I, MassiveDump, have a suckier life than he, jdog2016.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Telling the truth is not required.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I am providing round one to be for jdog to accept this challenge, and arguments will begin in round two.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;If anybody cares... probably not...&amp;nbsp;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/My-Life-Sucks-More-Than-My-Opponents/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-04-25T11:21:39-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Deep Space Nine was the best star Trek show.</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Deep-Space-Nine-was-the-best-star-Trek-show./1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I will be arguing that overall, Deep Space Nine (from now on abbreviated as DS9) was the best Star Trek. My opponent may argue that any of the others were better but cannot rely solely on one movie (for example using Wrath of Khan to prove the original series was the best).
The first round is for acceptance.
Good luck and may the best nerd win.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Deep-Space-Nine-was-the-best-star-Trek-show./1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T19:14:01-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Global warming is likely (and mostly) anthropogenic</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Global-warming-is-likely-and-mostly-anthropogenic/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) This is for Subutai's environmental tournament. 

In this debate, I am for the resolution. The BOP will be even since this is a contested issue--BOP shall not be negotiated. 

The debate structure is first round acceptance, second round arguments (no rebuttals), third round rebuttals/defense, fourth round rebuttals/defense. 

My opponent is familiar with the wording, and definitions are not needed. 

Have fun!</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Global-warming-is-likely-and-mostly-anthropogenic/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-16T15:18:36-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Economically, Ronald Reagan had better policies than Barrack Obama</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Economically-Ronald-Reagan-had-better-policies-than-Barrack-Obama/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I believe that President Ronald Reagan's economic policy was better for the United States of America than that of current President Barrack Obama. Burden of proof is shared, the debate will consist of four rounds, the first for accepting the debate, the second for opening arguments, the third for rebuttals, and the fourth for concluding arguments. This is my first debate so my skills may not quite be up to par.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Economically-Ronald-Reagan-had-better-policies-than-Barrack-Obama/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T23:05:58-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Should the Law of Indecency be Repealed?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Should-the-Law-of-Indecency-be-Repealed/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) New York and San Francisco find it perfectly natural for females and males alike to go nude in their cities, yet lean on the female favorable side. Now Washington, Seattle is producing events that sponsor nudity among the masses, and laws that allow nudity as long as it's not for obscene behavior.

Where then should the United States set it sights? Should the government crack down on these liberal and free living people, or should the Law of Indecency be utterly repealed, thereby letting everyone go naked or not as they wish?</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Should-the-Law-of-Indecency-be-Repealed/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T22:58:43-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument is Sound</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Leibnizian-Cosmological-Argument-is-Sound/2/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;&quot;&gt;The&amp;nbsp;The Leibnizian Cosmological Argument (LCA) is Sound.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;&quot;&gt;Definitions:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;&quot;&gt;LCA-&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;&quot;&gt;1. Everything that exists has an explanation of its existence, either in the necessity of its own nature or an external cause (Principle of Sufficient Reason).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;&quot;&gt;2. The universe exists.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;&quot;&gt;3. If the universe does have an explanation for its existence, that explanation is God.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: arial, helvetica, sans-serif;&quot;&gt;4. Therefore, the universe has an explanation of its existence (from 1 and 2).&lt;/span&gt;&lt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Leibnizian-Cosmological-Argument-is-Sound/2/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T22:52:05-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Does Marsellus Wallace look like a b*tch?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Does-Marsellus-Wallace-look-like-a-b-tch/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) I'd like to put forth the notion that there is a possibility that &quot;Marsellus Wallace,&quot; a powerful mob boss in Los Angeles, looks like a b*tch.

Other definitions will be put up more for connotation as the argument calls for. Sources can come from anywhere, and no suggestions will be made.

I will be arguing that Marsellus Wallace does, indeed, look like a b*tch while my opponent will be arguing that, no, he doesn't.

First round is acceptance.
Second round will be arguments.
Third round will be rebuttal, but arguments may be made.
Final round will only be rebuttal.

&quot;What&quot; is not to be said in any round.

Lack of adherence to these rules will cause a n*gger hiding in a bowl of rice to pop a cap in the a*s of the violator.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Does-Marsellus-Wallace-look-like-a-b-tch/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T22:31:05-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Song Debate</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Song-Debate/5/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;div&gt;1st round is acceptance. In rounds 2 through 5, each debater will post songs and lyrics. Voters are to vote on who posted the songs they liked the best.&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Song-Debate/5/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T22:14:27-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>&quot;Great Expectations&quot; by Charles Dickens sucks</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Great-Expectations-by-Charles-Dickens-sucks/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) The book &quot;Great Expectations that we had to read sucks, but you think it was good for some f*cking reason. Debate me on it.

AVE CAESAR. NOS MOROTARI TE SALVTANT.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Great-Expectations-by-Charles-Dickens-sucks/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T19:31:53-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>9/11 Conspiracy</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/9-11-Conspiracy/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I am not debating whether or not the planes hit the Two Towers because they did, but I am arguing that there is more to the story than what the 9/11 Commission 
 tells the public. 
Round 1- acceptance 
Round 2- arguments/rebuttals 
Round 3- arguments/rebuttals
Round 4- closing</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/9-11-Conspiracy/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T08:24:53-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Who is better at droppin some rap? John Lennon or Elvis?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Who-is-better-at-droppin-some-rap-John-Lennon-or-Elvis/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I think JL is the go</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Who-is-better-at-droppin-some-rap-John-Lennon-or-Elvis/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:33:55-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
