<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Debate.org: Ron-Paul's Debates</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=1&amp;sort=&amp;member=Ron%2DPaul</link>
<description>Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>2013-05-21T22:47:12-08:00</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>2013-05-21T22:47:12-08:00</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<title>The Minimum Wage Is a Sound Economic Policy</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Minimum-Wage-Is-a-Sound-Economic-Policy/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;You are the best,&amp;nbsp;most free person available who's wanted this.&lt;br /&gt;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;Full Resolution:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The Minimum Wage Is a Sound Economic Policy.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I will be negating this resolution.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;BoP is shared. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Definitions: &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;&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Sound: &quot;F&lt;span id=&quot;hotword&quot;&gt;&lt;span id=&quot;hotword&quot; style=&quot;color: #333333; cursor: default;&quot;&gt;inancially&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span id=&quot;hotword&quot; style=&quot;color: #333333; cursor: default;&quot;&gt;strong,&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span id=&quot;hotword&quot; style=&quot;color: #333333; cursor: default;&quot;&gt;secure,&lt;/span&gt; &lt;span id=&quot;hotword&quot; style=&quot;color: #333333; cursor: default;&quot;&gt;or reliable.&quot;[2]&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; Economic Policy: &quot;The actions taken by a government to&amp;nbsp; influence its economy.&quot;[3]&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rules:&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.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Minimum-Wage-Is-a-Sound-Economic-Policy/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-11-29T19:27:12-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Mankind Is the Main Cause of Global Warming</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Mankind-Is-the-Main-Cause-of-Global-Warming/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) You have asked to debate this first, so I am sending you the challenge directly. My last opponent on this subject forfeited, so I want to try this resolution again. 

Full Resolution:

Mankind is the main cause of global warming. I, as con, will argue that it is of natural causes, not mankind. 

We will NOT be arguing if global warming exists or not, it will be assumed that it does. Only if global warming has an anthropogenic cause. 

Definitions:

Mankind: &quot;The human race; human beings collectively without reference to sex; humankind.&quot;[1]

Main: &quot;Chief in size, extent, or importance; principal; leading;&quot;[2]

Cause: &quot;A person or thing that acts, happens, or exists in such a way that some specific thing happens as a result; the producer of an effect.&quot;[3]

Global Warming: &quot;Global warming is the rise in the average temperature of Earth's atmosphere and oceans since the late 19th century, and its projected continuation.&quot;[4]

Rules:

1. The first</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Mankind-Is-the-Main-Cause-of-Global-Warming/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-08-13T18:03:49-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>ODT: The Keystone XL Pipeline</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/ODT-The-Keystone-XL-Pipeline/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) This is for the ODT semi-finals. I would like to congratulate Contra for making it this far. 

Full Resolution: The Keystone XL Pipeline should be built in the US. 

Definitions:

Keystone XL Pipeline: &quot;...the 1,897-km (1,179-mile) Keystone XL Pipeline from Hardisty, Alberta to Steele City, Nebraska.&quot;[1]

Should: &quot;Must; ought&quot;[2]

Built: &quot;...past tense of build: To construct (especially something complex) by assembling and joining parts or materials.&quot;[3]

Rules:
 
1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules,and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed in the middle of the debate.
 
Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be given </description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/ODT-The-Keystone-XL-Pipeline/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-09-08T23:06:58-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Great Flood Was an Actual Historical Event</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Great-Flood-Was-an-Actual-Historical-Event/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Do you mind if we do this resolution instead?

Full Resolution:

The great flood was an actual historical event. 

BoP is shared. 

Definitions:

The Great Flood: &quot;Noah's flood - (Biblical) the great deluge that is said in the Book of Genesis to have occurred in the time of Noah; it was brought by God upon the earth because of the wickedness of human beings.&quot;[1]

Historical Event: &quot;Based on or concerned with events in history.&quot;[2]

Rules:

1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed from all moments after the debate has been formalized.

Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be giv</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Great-Flood-Was-an-Actual-Historical-Event/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-11-24T05:44:35-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Islam Is a Religion of Peace: part II</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Islam-Is-a-Religion-of-Peace-part-II/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) My opponent was unfortunately a few minutes late in posting his argument, so we have decided to make a part II. Try to be more careful in this debate about how much time you have left. The full resolution, definitions, rules, and debate structure are the same. Here is the previous debate: http://www.debate.org/debates/Islam-Is-a-Religion-of-Peace/3/

Enjoy.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Islam-Is-a-Religion-of-Peace-part-II/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-07-06T13:46:55-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>schools shouldn't cut art from the budget</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/schools-shouldnt-cut-art-from-the-budget/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) schools shouldn't cut funding for art in there budget because it encourages children to go to school every day.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/schools-shouldnt-cut-art-from-the-budget/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-09-11T10:01:30-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Islam Is a Religion of Terrorism</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Islam-Is-a-Religion-of-Terrorism/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) I have seen that you have been in a few of these debate, and I am interested. The first round is for acceptance.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Islam-Is-a-Religion-of-Terrorism/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-05-08T06:16:31-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Obama's Economic Policies Have Been Successful</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Obamas-Economic-Policies-Have-Been-Successful/2/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) TheElderScroll and I are redoing this debate since I forfeited the last one. We will simply copy our original arguments until we get to round 4. 

Full Resolution:

President Barack Obama's economic policies have been successful. 

Definitions: 

Barack Obama: &quot;...the 44th and current President of the United States.&quot;[1]

Economic policy: &quot;...the actions that governments take in the economic field. It covers the systems for setting interest rates and government budget as well as the labor market, national ownership, and many other areas of government interventions into the economy.&quot;[2]

Successful: &quot;[having achieved] the favorable or prosperous termination of attempts or endeavors.&quot;[3]

Rules: 

1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your roun</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Obamas-Economic-Policies-Have-Been-Successful/2/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-11-10T00:48:42-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Austerity Measures Are the Proper Response to a Debt Crisis</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Austerity-Measures-Are-the-Proper-Response-to-a-Debt-Crisis/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Sorry about not getting this out sooner. The first round is for acceptance.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Austerity-Measures-Are-the-Proper-Response-to-a-Debt-Crisis/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-04-17T03:06:01-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Kalam Cosmological Argument Is a Sound Argument for God's Existance</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Kalam-Cosmological-Argument-Is-a-Sound-Argument-for-Gods-Existance/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) I would like to thank my opponent for agreeing to this topic. I am going to make this max characters (8000 characters). I will have time. But only 4 rounds.

Rules:

1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics. 
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure can not be changed in the middle of the debate. 
5. In the case of the breaking of any of these rules, all seven points in voting should be given to the other person.

Definitions: 

Kalam Cosmological Argument: 

&quot;1. Everything that has a beginning of its existence has a cause of its existence; 
2. The universe has a beginning of its existence; 
3. Therefore: The universe has a cause of its existence.&quot;[1]
This cause is of course, God

Sound: &quot;Competent, sensible, or valid&quot;&quot;Having no defect as to truth, justice, wisdom, or reason.&quot;[2]

God: &quot;The one supreme being, the creator and ruler of the universe.&quot;[3]

Existance: &quot;The </description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Kalam-Cosmological-Argument-Is-a-Sound-Argument-for-Gods-Existance/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-07-03T13:35:31-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Humans are the main cause of global warming</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Humans-are-the-main-cause-of-global-warming/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) The CON must prove humans do not play a significant role in global warming. I recommend a experienced debater that opposes global warming to debate with me. 

EDIT: Per Ron-Paul's request, the resolution is changed and the voting period is now 1 month.

My Starting Arguments:

Yes, the Earth is warming. Since the early 20th century, Earth's mean surface temperature has increased by about 0.8 &quot;C (1.4 &quot;F), with about two-thirds of the increase occurring since 1980.[1]

Is it caused mainly by humans? Humans have increased the amount of Co2, a greenhouse gas. Greenhouse gases increase the Earth's temperature.

&quot;Since the beginning of the Industrial Revolution, the burning of fossil fuels has contributed to the increase in carbon dioxide in the atmosphere from 280 ppm to 397 ppm, despite the uptake of a large portion of the emissions through various natural &quot;sinks&quot; involved in the carbon cycle.&quot;[2] 

Plus, global warming could cause ice cap melting. Dan </description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Humans-are-the-main-cause-of-global-warming/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-11-19T23:46:42-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Resolved: Gay marriage ought be legalized.</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Gay-marriage-ought-be-legalized./4/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;This round is for acceptance only.&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Gay-marriage-ought-be-legalized./4/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-01-14T06:33:37-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Bible does not contradict itself</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Bible-does-not-contradict-itself/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;Hello, I will be debating Pro for the resolution. The same guidelines for every debate apply.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;And by &quot;Bible&quot; I mean the Scriptures that are recognized to be sacred by the Church:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;table id=&quot;books-of-bible&quot; border=&quot;0&quot;&gt;
&lt;tbody&gt;
&lt;tr&gt;
&lt;td&gt;Old Testament
&lt;ul&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=1&amp;amp;ver=kjv&quot;&gt;Genesis&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=2&amp;amp;ver=kjv&quot;&gt;Exodus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=3&amp;amp;ver=kjv&quot;&gt;Leviticus&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=4&amp;amp;ver=kjv&quot;&gt;Numbers&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=5&amp;amp;ver=kjv&quot;&gt;Deuteronomy&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=6&amp;amp;ver=kjv&quot;&gt;Joshua&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=7&amp;amp;ver=kjv&quot;&gt;Judges&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.christnotes.org/bible.php?book=8&amp;amp;ver=kjv</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Bible-does-not-contradict-itself/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-10-05T19:12:13-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The General Theory of Relativity Is True</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-General-Theory-of-Relativity-Is-True/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Anti-atheist made a comment on a debate claiming that the theory of relativity is false, so I challenge him to this debate to see if he can back up his claim.

The definition: &quot;The second is the General Theory of Relativity, which primarily applies to particles as they accelerate, particularly due to gravitation, and acts as a radical revision of Newton&quot;s theory, predicting important new results for fast-moving and/or very massive bodies.&quot;[1]

Rules:
 
1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed from all moments after the debate has been formalized.
 
Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-General-Theory-of-Relativity-Is-True/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-12-23T20:42:28-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Austerity Measures Are the Proper Response to a Debt Crisis</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Austerity-Measures-Are-the-Proper-Response-to-a-Debt-Crisis/2/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Before I lay out the structure of this debate, I would like to apologize to TheElderScroll for all the delay and confusion in trying to set up this debate. It's been a very busy week for me. Also, please read everything below before accepting.

Full Resolution:

Austerity Measures Are the Proper Response to a Debt Crisis. 

I will be affirming the resolution, arguing that spending cuts are better than tax increases in solving debt crises, my opponent will be arguing the opposite. This debate is going to be specifically examining the ever approaching fiscal cliff that the United States has found itself in. 

The BoP is shared. 

Definitions:

Austerity Measures: &quot;A state of reduced spending and increased frugality in the financial sector. Austerity measures generally refer to the measures taken by governments to reduce expenditures in an attempt to shrink their growing budget deficits.&quot;[1]

Proper: &quot;Adapted or appropriate to the purpose or circumst</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Austerity-Measures-Are-the-Proper-Response-to-a-Debt-Crisis/2/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-12-19T08:03:26-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Taxes should be decreased for the Rich</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Taxes-should-be-decreased-for-the-Rich/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) The first round is for acceptance. I'm just throwing out debate topics.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Taxes-should-be-decreased-for-the-Rich/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-02-13T15:46:59-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Affirmative Action</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Affirmative-Action/22/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Here is the challenge. 

Full Resolution:

Affirmative action is good. 

I will be negating this resolution. 

BoP is shared. 

Definitions:

Affirmative Action: &quot;A policy in which an individual's color, race, sex, religion or national origin are taken into account by a business or the government in order to increase the opportunities provided to an underrepresented part of society. Affirmative action is designed to increase the number of people from certain groups within businesses, institutions and other areas of society in which they have historically had low representation. It is often considered a means of countering historical discrimination against a particular group.&quot;[1]

Good: &quot;Satisfactory in quality, quantity, or degree.&quot;[2]

Rules:

1. The first round is for acceptance. 
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed wi</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Affirmative-Action/22/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-12-15T05:50:05-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Public Labor Unions Are Beneficial to Society</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Public-Labor-Unions-Are-Beneficial-to-Society/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Full Resolution:

Public labor unions are beneficial to society. 

I will be negating this resolution. 

BoP is shared. 

Definitions:

Public Labor Unions: &quot;An organization intended to represent the collective interests of workers in negotiations with employers over wages, hours and working conditions. Labor unions are often industry-specific and tend to be more common in manufacturing, mining, construction, transportation and the public sector.&quot;[1] Public means government run.

Beneficial: &quot;Conferring benefit; advantageous; helpful.&quot;[2]

Society: &quot;The body of human beings generally, associated or viewed as members of a community.&quot;[3]

Rules:

1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rul</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Public-Labor-Unions-Are-Beneficial-to-Society/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-12-13T18:58:23-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Confederates were much better than the Yankees</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Confederates-were-much-better-than-the-Yankees/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) For the debater who accepts, you can start posting arguments when you post your Round 1. In other words, fire the opening shots. And thanks in advance to the debater who accepts this debate, and make sure you are ready for a good debate.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Confederates-were-much-better-than-the-Yankees/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-01-08T17:09:35-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Bible Contains Scientific Errors</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Bible-Contains-Scientific-Errors/2/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) I challenge you to this resolution because you said you wanted to debate this a while back.

Full Resolution:

The Bible contains scientific errors.

Definitions:

The Bible: The Bible agreed upon by my opponent.

Contains: Has inside.

Scientific Errors: Statements that contradict science facts or accepted theories (for example evolution).

Rules:

1. The first round is for acceptance.
2. A forfeit or concession is not allowed.
3. No semantics, trolling, or lawyering.
4. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed without asking in the comments before you post your round 1 argument. Debate resolution, definitions, rules, and structure cannot be changed from all moments after the debate has been formalized.

Voters, in the case of the breaking of any of these rules by either debater, all seven points in voting should be given to the other person.

Debate Structure:

Round 1: Acceptance and the choosing of a ve</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Bible-Contains-Scientific-Errors/2/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-11-23T14:49:28-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
