http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=1&sort=&member=Yraelz Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/ en-us 2013-05-19T07:58:09-08:00 2013-05-19T07:58:09-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/That-we-should-pay-people-to-donate-blood/1/ (Post Voting Period) Thanks Yraelz for agreeing to debate this topic with me. My model in this debate is simple. People who give their blood to registered blood-banks in order to help save those in need ought to be given some kind of recompense, notwithstanding reasonable restrictions that for the most part already exist in blood-banks (ie you have to be a certain age, you can't give blood too often, you can't have deadly blood-diseases etc). This incentive would be funded via the blood-bank themselves, who are typically funded by some combination of government or user-pays. Blood types in high demand could command greater income. Now that you know where I stand in the debate and what we're arguing over, I can't wait to get started. First round for acceptance. 72 hours per round. 8000 chars. 1 week voting. Good luck! http://www.debate.org/debates/That-we-should-pay-people-to-donate-blood/1/comments/ 2013-05-10T16:27:49-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-USFG-should-initiate-a-public-contract-bid-for-a-pilot-lunar-terraforming-project./1/ (Post Voting Period) Some quick definitions. Terraforming: Deliberately modifying a celestial body to make habitable by humans. Lunar: Relating to the moon. Pilot: A small scale project, perhaps only a few square meters in area. Contract bid: A process in which the best qualified company with the lowest bid will be granted the contract. So my position in this debate is that the United State Federal Government should offer a contract bid to all U.S. companies / entities. The bid will be for the winner to create a pilot terraforming project on the moon. Since this will be a pilot project, the area would be contained and only that area would be terraformed. In other words, the atmosphere, temperature, ecology, and topography would become amenable to human habitation within that confined space. Or at least, that would be the focus. Anyone care to oppose? First round is acceptance, 2nd and 3rd round are debating, and the fourth round should be for rebuttals. http://www.debate.org/debates/The-USFG-should-initiate-a-public-contract-bid-for-a-pilot-lunar-terraforming-project./1/comments/ 2013-03-19T21:58:22-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Andrew-Jackson-Good-or-Bad-President/1/ (Post Voting Period) Andrew Jackson, though an American hero, was stubborn and vioent. At one point Andrew Jackso was told to just watch and protect the border but instead he decided to attack and take Florida. The government just overlooked all his issues because of what he did for America. But, he was a normal citizen and should have had some consequences for his actions. http://www.debate.org/debates/Andrew-Jackson-Good-or-Bad-President/1/comments/ 2013-03-23T11:24:29-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/This-House-believes-Creationism-is-not-a-productive-form-of-education-in-public-schools/1/ (Post Voting Period) As it states in the title from my observations and research on the topic of creationism I do not believe it is a productive form of education for young people (who are in Primary, Secondary Schools, College and University) I am basing my observations from what I have seen from representatives such as PPsimons cooperation, Creationtoday and more. I will be making two points in total and a summary (will expand upon the points in the next round) 1) Creationism bias creates conflict 2) Unsubstantiated conclusions Creationism is a very biased form of education. I fear if creationism were to be promoted it would promote discrimination and prejudice amongst communities. For example Creationism is often viewed as a Christian orientated point of view to promote the belief in their god. Whereas people with different beliefs would feel isolated and ostracised for believing in something else. It is not an all-inclusive process of education. It doesn't promote http://www.debate.org/debates/This-House-believes-Creationism-is-not-a-productive-form-of-education-in-public-schools/1/comments/ 2013-03-21T13:25:46-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/It-is-plausible-that-Santa-Claus-exists./1/ (Post Voting Period) My position is pretty simple. I think that it is scientifically plausible that Santa Claus exists. This of course includes all Santa Claus attributes such as delivering presents to everyone in one night and ya da ya da ya. My disclaimer on this however is that Santa Claus in my interpretation only delivers to those who believe in him. Definition: plausible - In this case meaning possible. Thus I present the challenge, someone show me that some part of Santa Claus is simply made up....... http://www.debate.org/debates/It-is-plausible-that-Santa-Claus-exists./1/comments/ 2008-12-20T11:52:24-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-mongeese-vs.-Yraelz/1/ (Voting Period) Rules: http://www.debate.org/forums/debate.org/topic/1972/ My team: Link Kirby Yami Yugi Seto Kaiba Midna For more info: http://www.debate.org/debate/9035/ My opening strategies: 1. Mind Control Yugi possesses the Millennium Rod, which allows him to take control of other people (http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Millennium_Rod). In addition to this, he has the Millennium Ring, which allows him to tap into the magical powers of his Duel Monsters cards (http://yugioh.wikia.com/wiki/Millennium_Ring), and between them, Kaiba and Yugi have Brain Control, Change of Heart, and Enemy Controller. Using these cards and the Rod, they could easily control my opponent's entire team, and either feed them to Kirby or sacrifice them to the Winged Dragon of Ra. My opponent will probably explain why this won't work on some of his characters, but anyone who survives can be eliminated by Ra, as long as I have enough people to sacrifice, because it would have the co http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-mongeese-vs.-Yraelz/1/comments/ 2009-09-18T15:40:39-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Lm-Classic-Yraelz-vs.-Acer/1/ (Voting Period) Here are all of the rules: http://www.debate.org/forums/debate.org/topic/1972/ I wish my opponent luck. My team: 1. Sephiroth For anyone who doesn't know, he was the main protagonist in the final fantasy 7 series. Powers: He has a lot, notable ones are the ability to teleport, to move faster than the speed of light, his super nova attack, meteor... http://www.theyoungone.net/rpg/seph_bio.htm http://villains.wikia.com/wiki/Sephiroth http://www.animevice.com/sephiroth/18-21175/ http://finalfantasy.wikia.com/wiki/Sephiroth 2. Black Alice, before she went to Hell and was traumatized. Powers: She has the ability to steal the powers of others. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_Alice_(comics) 3. Sentry (Robert Reynolds) Powers: Super hearing, can move faster than light, energy projection, control of light, passive radiation, resuscitation, the ability to implant memories. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sentry_(Robert_Reynolds)#Powers http://www.debate.org/debates/Lm-Classic-Yraelz-vs.-Acer/1/comments/ 2009-08-12T16:57:28-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Electoral-College-Should-Be-Abandoned/1/ (Voting Period) It seems as though every time I find myself in a discussion regarding the Electoral College I hear people saying that it should be abandoned in favor of a nationwide popular vote for the presidency. This argument is so completely absurd that my skin crawls every time I hear it. The Founding Fathers knew what they were doing, and they created a structure of government that has lasted for over two centuries. Furthermore, countries all around the world have emulated our democracy. The Electoral College is part of the U.S. Constitution for very good reasons and anyone who opposes it hasn't done his/her homework. In my experience, people only argue against the Electoral College when the candidate they favor for president doesn't win the election. Is there someone out there willing to discuss the issue of abandoning the Electoral College System and replacing it with a Nationwide Popular Vote? http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Electoral-College-Should-Be-Abandoned/1/comments/ 2009-03-21T00:21:43-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Polygamy-in-the-United-States-should-be-legal./1/ (Post Voting Period) Please don't take this debate if you are brand new to this site. Please don't take this debate if you feel you might not have the time to complete it. Please don't take this debate if you're not sure you can beat me. Please don't take this debate if you're going to argue that there are objective truths and this is one of them under god the father above. (You will abhor my responses to said argument and I WILL beat you.) Please take a good thirty minutes to consider if you really want to take this debate after you first learn of it's existence. Having said all of that my position in this round is obviously for polygamy. My argument is that it is vastly more beneficial than our current system of single marriages. Your turn, have fun. ~.^ http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Polygamy-in-the-United-States-should-be-legal./1/comments/ 2009-03-14T14:53:10-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Under-the-below-listed-rules-my-opponent-will-lose-this-debate./1/ (Voting Period) Rules so far: 1. Rules that come before other rules are of greater importance and will be evaluated first. Rules that contradict earlier rules will be void. 1.5 Rules that force a debater to say nothing in any round will be void. This point can be argued. 2. No rule shall explicitly state that a debater will lose the debate without giving them a chance to avoid the rule. Obviously if a debater feels one of the rules has not given them this chance it will be debated and left to the voters to decide. 3. If a debater has already violated one of the rules before or at the same time that a the rule is put into place this violation shall be considered null and void. 4. A violation of any rule will result in the debater losing this debate unless explicitly stated otherwise in the rule. 5. If a debater uses any of the words: Avoid, bicep, cardiovascular, debater, ethical, fallacy, gargantuan, horse, icky, jungle, keep, llama, magical, no, optical http://www.debate.org/debates/Under-the-below-listed-rules-my-opponent-will-lose-this-debate./1/comments/ 2008-03-04T18:10:34-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Does-the-End-Justify-the-Means/1/ (Voting Period) The End justifies the Means. Whenever we approach a scenario, we should only think about the ends. The means are irrelevant except as to their impact on the Ends. As long as the Ends are justified, than the means are justified as well. (feel free to dispute the word justified or any other word in the opening) http://www.debate.org/debates/Does-the-End-Justify-the-Means/1/comments/ 2008-03-01T23:04:47-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-Yraelz-vs.-feverish/1/ (Voting Period) Sorry for the much belated debate Feverish, here goes. My team: 1. Sentry 2. Sephiroth 3. Ichigo Kurasaki 4. Black Alice 5. Emma Frost Chances are, my opponents team is something like: Monkey, Boba Fett, Predator, Iron Man and Count Dracula. So I'll start with Monkey. Straight up, he's a god. The limitation against using gods has been put into place in order to avoid characters without limits. Monkey himself has rejected the title of god, that being said, he's joined heaven, and been granted the title of god, on two separate occasions. He rejected the title, not because he wasn't a god, but rather because he didn't like how he was treated in heaven. Furthermore it should be noted that he has single handedly beaten all of the gods of heaven. He's a god.... That being said, maybe I can still beat him...... The strategy: +++++++++++++++ Negative one Second +++++++++++++++ Sentry's molecules move a second ahead of the normal time line. http://www.debate.org/debates/LM-Classic-Yraelz-vs.-feverish/1/comments/ 2010-01-24T12:22:54-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/A-border-fence-is-useless/1/ (Voting Period) Just a little disclaimer: Illegal immigration is a problem. If you believe that illegal immigration is just fine, this debate isn't for you. If you are for loosening regulations, as I am, feel free to debate. Because illegal immigration is a problem, people look for a solution. To many, the most practical solution seems to be a fence. Now, I'm not saying that it should be completely open. There should be some fence, but not a big 50 foot tall one. Look, if you build a 50 foot wall, someone will build a 51 foot ladder. In this debate, I plan to discuss a few issues, including: 1) Explicitly spell out why the border fence wouldn't work 2) Find more reasonable alternatives 3) Understand how and why people immigrate illegally, then attack those things. http://www.debate.org/debates/A-border-fence-is-useless/1/comments/ 2009-03-13T13:55:12-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Outer-space-exploration-should-be-pursued./1/ (Voting Period) I am actually not to sure where I stand on this issue nor am I sure what all points I will be using status quo. Thus I am going to allow my opponent not only to have the first speech but also to have the last speech, do with it what you will. http://www.debate.org/debates/Outer-space-exploration-should-be-pursued./1/comments/ 2008-05-19T10:17:04-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/UNDER-THE-BELOW-LISTED-RULES-MY-OPPONENT-WILL-LOSE-THIS-DEBATE./3/ (Voting Period) MY OPPONENT WAS THE CHALLENGER IN THE PREVIOUS "UNDER THE BELOW LISTED RULES MY OPPONENT WILL LOSE THIS DEBATE", SO I THOUGH IT WOULD BE A GOOD TOPIC TO CHALLENGE HIM WITH SINCE HE STATES IN HIS PROFILE PAGE THAT "I believe any position can be advocated for successfully it just requires a little persuasion." IN THAT CASE, HERE ARE THE RULES I AM LAYING DOWN FOR THIS DEBATE: 1) MY OPPONENT IS NOT ALLOWED TO ARGUE IN THIS DEBATE IN SUCH A WAY THAT COULD BE ADVANTAGEOUS TO THE POSSIBILITY OF HIM GETTING VOTES FOR ANY REASON, BE IT IN A CONVINCING MANNER, OR OTHERWISE. 2) MY OPPONENT IS NOT ALLOWED TO USE LETTERS IN HIS ARGUMENTS, ONLY NUMBERS. 3) MY OPPONENT IS NOT PERMITTED TO SUBMIT ANY ARGUMENTS UNTIL THE LAST ROUND. 4) MY OPPONENT MUST LEVITATE THROUGHOUT THE DURATION OF THE DEBATE WITHOUT TOUCHING ANYTHING BUT HIS KEYBOARD. HATS OFF TO MY OPPONENT IF HE ACCEPTS THIS DEBATE, LET ALONE WINS IT. http://www.debate.org/debates/UNDER-THE-BELOW-LISTED-RULES-MY-OPPONENT-WILL-LOSE-THIS-DEBATE./3/comments/ 2008-03-31T11:18:37-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Under-the-below-listed-rules-my-opponent-will-lose-this-debate./2/ (Voting Period) 1. The only rules of this debate will be in Pro round 1. Failure to obey this rule results in an automatic loss. 2. Each debater must include any quote that a user puts in the comment section for the debater to include, in their next round. However these quotes must be in the following form: Dear -insert debaters name-, please include the following quote, "-insert quote-" into your next speech. These quotes can be absolutely anything but must be appropriate (inappropriate quotes are not to be included in round). Appropriate can be debated in round and will be left to the discretion of the voters should no conclusion be reached. 3. Quotes (see rule 2) shall be added into the round from the comment section as if it was actually the debater speaking. These quotes shall be considered to be part of the debaters case and will hold ground in the debate. 4. The debater who does the better debating will win this debate. http://www.debate.org/debates/Under-the-below-listed-rules-my-opponent-will-lose-this-debate./2/comments/ 2008-03-01T01:22:29-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Voters-should-be-required-to-post-their-reasoning-behind-each-vote-they-make./1/ (Voting Period) I like debate. I like debate.org. I think it is a really cool idea. However I find myself often dissatisfied with the voters. In debates where I feel I have clearly won its not so bad because to some extent I can justify my loss in my head with the thought, "Wow... those people are idiots!" Its when I'm debating someone of equal or similar skill level to myself that this annoys me the most. To lose a debate that I am unsure of how I did on and personally feel was close is o.k. in itself. But when I do not know why I have lost that debate I can't actually modify my strategy or improve my debating skills. Therefor I advocate that each time someone votes they should be required to post a reason for why they have voted in such a way. While many comments will doubtlessly say something to the effect of, "~INSERT DEBATER~ IS STUPID!" or just a persons personal view on the issue I feel that some would actually post helpful criticism. (The voting comment section http://www.debate.org/debates/Voters-should-be-required-to-post-their-reasoning-behind-each-vote-they-make./1/comments/ 2008-02-28T19:46:40-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/Debaters-should-not-be-given-the-option-of-mandating-a-5-12-question-MC-quiz-for-their-debates-here./1/ (Voting Period) Ever since the opening of debate.org, many debaters have felt that faulty voting has been occurring during their debates. Personally, I agree with this and feel that many voters don't even read the debates before voting. In fact, I am inclined to believe that some debaters merely email their friends, have them make debate.org accounts, and vote in favor of all their debates. In today's debate, I am going to advocate the solution mentioned in the topic. It will be my opponent's job to argue against this solution. With that said, let us proceed. The plan would work rather simply. Before each round, debaters would have the option of creating a Multiple Choice quiz that consist of what the actual information within the round is. Each debater would be allowed to create such quizzes for each round, but would only be allowed to ask a maximum of 12 questions for the entire debate. In order to vote on debates, voters would have to score a passing grade on the qui http://www.debate.org/debates/Debaters-should-not-be-given-the-option-of-mandating-a-5-12-question-MC-quiz-for-their-debates-here./1/comments/ 2008-02-12T13:42:11-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/According-to-the-American-Heritage-dictionary-the-contender-in-this-debate-is-NOT-an-idiot./1/ (Voting Period) First, I'd like to present the definition of idiot which is provided by American Heritage dictionary: ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- American Heritage Dictionary - Cite This Source - Share This id·i·ot (ĭd'ē-ət) Pronunciation Key n. A foolish or stupid person. A person of profound mental retardation having a mental age below three years and generally being unable to learn connected speech or guard against common dangers. The term belongs to a classification system no longer in use and is now considered offensive. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- With that out of the way, the job of the contender will be to prove that he/she is an idiot according to either of these definitions provided in the American Heritage dictionary. My argument: Because my opponent is capable of using debate.org, he/she cannot be labeled by either of these definitions. http://www.debate.org/debates/According-to-the-American-Heritage-dictionary-the-contender-in-this-debate-is-NOT-an-idiot./1/comments/ 2008-01-14T19:58:49-08:00 http://www.debate.org/debates/An-ideal-form-of-NCLB-would-be-beneficial-to-the-welfare-of-the-United-States./1/ (Voting Period) Thanks to my opponent and judges. Here goes! Here is a brief summary of no child left behind and what it intended to do: 'The law reauthorized a number of federal programs aiming to improve the performance of U.S. primary and secondary schools by increasing the standards of accountability for states, school districts, and schools, as well as providing parents more flexibility in choosing which schools their children will attend." The bottom line of such is an aim at improving the performance of U.S. primary and secondary schools. Ideal: (n) a conception of something in its perfection. Thus the ideal form of no child left behind would perfectly achieve improving the performance of U.S. primary and secondary schools. I'd argue that increased education is a definite benefit to the welfare of the United States. Not only through economic competitiveness but also through increased vaccines and cures for societal ills (as in diseases). All I have http://www.debate.org/debates/An-ideal-form-of-NCLB-would-be-beneficial-to-the-welfare-of-the-United-States./1/comments/ 2009-03-26T19:44:26-08:00