<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Debate.org: Society Debates</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=1&amp;sort=1&amp;category=Society</link>
<description>Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>2013-05-20T01:45:20-08:00</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>2013-05-20T01:45:20-08:00</lastBuildDate>
<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Should the Law of Indecency be Repealed?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http://www.debate.org/debates/Should-the-Law-of-Indecency-be-Repealed/1/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 Should the government crack down on these liberal and free living people, or should the Law of Indecency be utterly repealed, thereby letting everyone go naked or not as they wish?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http://www.debate.org/debates/Should-the-Law-of-Indecency-be-Repealed/1/comments/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>Prostitution should be legalized</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Prostitution-should-be-legalized/7/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;This is the first debate that I posted.&amp;nbsp; I am new to this side but looking forward to debating this topic.&amp;nbsp; As shown above, I am arguing in favor of legalizing prostitution.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; Just for you information, I am not used to this debating format and so I will almost inevetibely make some sort of mistake.&amp;nbsp; I do know how to make a point however and so don't expect the debate to be a pushover.&amp;nbsp; Finally, have fun.&amp;nbsp; This is a serious topic but some light-heartedness goes a long way.&amp;nbsp; &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt; Good Luck.&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Prostitution-should-be-legalized/7/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-10T11:24:51-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Believing in a religion is illogical</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Believing-in-a-religion-is-illogical/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) There are no good reasons to believe in a religion. I am letting the opponent begin the debate.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Believing-in-a-religion-is-illogical/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T20:06:39-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Resolved: Only cool animals should be protected under the endangered species act.</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Only-cool-animals-should-be-protected-under-the-endangered-species-act./1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) This is a Round 1 debate of Subutai's tournament with the theme of it being the environment. For clarification, this challenge was sent specifically to imabench.

I will give imabench the option to either use the first round for acceptance or to start his arguments there.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Only-cool-animals-should-be-protected-under-the-endangered-species-act./1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-07T03:03:59-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Is it the society that creates a terrorist?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-it-the-society-that-creates-a-terrorist/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) it is not the society that creates a terrorist.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-it-the-society-that-creates-a-terrorist/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-17T23:29:08-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Eugenics: Right or Wrong?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Eugenics-Right-or-Wrong/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) My Argument:

Eugenics- the study of or belief in the possibility of improving the qualities of the human species or a human population, especially by such means as discouraging reproduction by persons having genetic defects or presumed to have inheritable undesirable traits (negative eugenics) or encouraging reproduction by persons presumed to have inheritable desirable traits (positive eugenics).

Eugenics is an immoral practice that should be banned in all countries. Even though the practice does not present itself a daily it is still being practiced and abused for the benefit others in other countries including India, China, and United States. 

I feel that subjecting some to eugenics because of their negative or undesirable traits is wrong. Who are you to say that someone's traits are undesirable. 

Undesirable - Not wanted or desirable because harmful, objectionable, or unpleasant: &quot;the drug's undesirable side effects&quot;.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Eugenics-Right-or-Wrong/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-04T02:59:22-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>That we should pay people to donate blood</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/That-we-should-pay-people-to-donate-blood/1/</link>
<description>(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!</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/That-we-should-pay-people-to-donate-blood/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-10T16:27:49-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Gay Marriage is Morally wrong and should not be Legalized</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Gay-Marriage-is-Morally-wrong-and-should-not-be-Legalized/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) The topic at hand is that we should not legalize gay marriage. (1) traditional Marriage in its sense, is defined as a bonding between one man and one woman. Not marrying in the same-sex. (2) Same-Sex marriage is morally wrong.

(1) http://legal-dictionary.thefreedictionary.com 

round 1 counts as accepting the argument and making your opening statements</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Gay-Marriage-is-Morally-wrong-and-should-not-be-Legalized/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-04-24T11:39:42-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Would some trumpet players' trumpets be better for hats?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Would-some-trumpet-players-trumpets-be-better-for-hats/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) This is arguing that some trumpets in our band would be better off using their trumpets as hats instead of playing them.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Would-some-trumpet-players-trumpets-be-better-for-hats/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-05T16:18:34-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>imabench is an ignorant fvuck tard</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/imabench-is-an-ignorant-fvuck-tard/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Look at his weekly stupid. He also pretends to be a christian but talks about seaman in kim kardasahns mouth. You sir need to take an IQ test

http://iqtest.com/

u'll score so low on it</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/imabench-is-an-ignorant-fvuck-tard/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-04-22T13:39:54-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Resolved: Rehabilitation Should Be Valued Above Retribution</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Rehabilitation-Should-Be-Valued-Above-Retribution/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;This is for Spinko's Elo tournament.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-decoration: underline;&quot;&gt;Burden of proof&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;The BoP rests neither fully on myself or my opponent but we should each make a case. I for rehabilitation and con for retribution. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-decoration: underline;&quot;&gt;Definitions &lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Rehabilitation: to restore to a positive state, such as in restoring a criminal to good standing in society&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Retribution: punishment enacted due to the receivers deserving of it &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Disputing the definitions is fine but should be done in the comments section prior to accepting the debate.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-decoration: underline;&quot;&gt;Guidelines/rules&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;No abusive semantics. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First round is acceptance. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;For the second round, I will present make case. My opponent is free to take one of two options. (1) Refute my case while making one of his own. (2) Make a case o</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-Rehabilitation-Should-Be-Valued-Above-Retribution/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-04-10T08:06:59-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Do Jews control America</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Do-Jews-control-America/2/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) I recently saw this debate where pro won, so I decided to challenge him, and anyone else who has this perverted view. Please do not accept unless you have an ELO of at least 2,000.

Resolved: Jews control America. I'm Con.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Do-Jews-control-America/2/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-05T14:55:06-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Homosexual actions are immoral</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Homosexual-actions-are-immoral/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: medium;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: large;&quot;&gt;= = = = = = = Introduction = = = = = = =&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: medium;&quot;&gt;This debate is on the morality of homosexual acts with more emphasis on sodomy but not excluding other homosexual acts. I will have the burden of proof in this debate and as such, will be arguing for the affirmation of the resolution. Con must only rebut my case.&amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-family: 'Times New Roman', serif; font-size: medium;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: large;&quot;&gt;= = = = = = = Debate Guidelines = = = = = = =&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: medium; font-family: 'times new roman', times;&quot;&gt;1. First Round is for acceptance&lt;br /&gt;2. Opening Arguments/Rebuttals&lt;br /&gt;3. Rebuttals/Arguments&lt;br /&gt;4. Closing statements/Rebuttals&lt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Homosexual-actions-are-immoral/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-10-10T15:23:32-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>THE OFFICIAL IZBO TRIAL; Resolved: Izbo10 should be permanently banned</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/THE-OFFICIAL-IZBO-TRIAL-Resolved-Izbo10-should-be-permanently-banned/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Full resolution: By way of undue harm to the site and the community as a whole, Izbo10 should be permanently banned from DDO.

Rules:

There will be 5 Rounds.

R1: Opening statement
R2: Additional charges/rebuttals
R3: Rebuttals
R4: Cross Examination/Additional Rebuttals
R5: Closing Arguments

Izbo10 also stipulates by accepting that if he uses this debate as a forum for additional abuses and TOS violations that he will be instantly banned.

Welcome ladies and gentlemen of the jury. We all want a quick trial, so let's proceed immediately to the charges against izbo10. 

1) He has sent harassing private messages to users.

Izbo10 shows open contempt towards a large number of DDO users and has initiated personal vendettas against many of them (both vote bombing those users and harassing them). Throughout this debate, I will not have enough character space to present ALL the evidence against Izbo10 (you could probably fill a book with his insults</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/THE-OFFICIAL-IZBO-TRIAL-Resolved-Izbo10-should-be-permanently-banned/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2011-12-13T08:03:46-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Marijuana should be legalized</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Marijuana-should-be-legalized/22/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) I see you are against drug legalization. Well I beg to differ I will let you have the first argument.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Marijuana-should-be-legalized/22/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-11T23:55:31-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Homosexual couples can raise children just as well as heterosexual couples.</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Homosexual-couples-can-raise-children-just-as-well-as-heterosexual-couples./1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) This debate is based on my opponent's assertion that homosexual couples cannot raise children as well as heterosexual couples. He's agreed to debate me on this topic before; however, due to my work schedule I was unable to participate and had to forfeit. Apparently he has a lot of credible sources to back up his point of view. While I don't care about the automatic loss, I'd like the opportunity for my opponent to defend his beliefs. I'm planning on taking Thursday off, so hopefully that plus the weekend will give me enough time to come on DDO for a few minutes and post my rounds. 

There should be no semantics used in this discussion. I think it's obvious which position each of us will be defending. My opponent can begin his argument now, or use the first round for acceptance only and wait for me to open the debate in Round 2. Thank you in advance to MouthWash and I wish him the best of luck in this debate...</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Homosexual-couples-can-raise-children-just-as-well-as-heterosexual-couples./1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2012-08-26T22:15:09-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Women Workplace Discrimination</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Women-Workplace-Discrimination/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) &lt;div&gt;Resolved:&amp;nbsp;A significant portion of&amp;nbsp;the wage gap in America is due to employers' unfair discriminating based of gender. An insignificant would be defined as three cents difference for every dollar. &amp;nbsp;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;I am CON. &lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Debate rules:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span&gt;1. No semantics.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span&gt;2. First Round for acceptance, and rule and definition clearification only.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span&gt;3. No new arguments in the last round.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span&gt;4. Text-only debate.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span&gt;5. All source material must be easily accessable&lt;/span&gt;&amp;nbsp;&lt;/div&gt;</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Women-Workplace-Discrimination/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-02-21T07:10:17-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>EVERYONE takes life for granted, even religious people at some point in their life.</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/EVERYONE-takes-life-for-granted-even-religious-people-at-some-point-in-their-life./1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) I bet everyone has taken life for granted at some point. Even as a kid you didnt understand what it ever meant to take life for granted but by the time I turned 12 at least, I had realized how lucky I was even if I wasn't as happy as the average person should.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/EVERYONE-takes-life-for-granted-even-religious-people-at-some-point-in-their-life./1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-10T17:10:33-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Driving age should be raised to 21!!!!</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Driving-age-should-be-raised-to-21/3/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Nowadays driving age is 18 years old. Everybody endeavor to obtain driving lisence at this peroid of life. Will be better to raise driving age because young drivers are the main cause of road deaths. In addition, young poeple drink and after they still to drive, If driving age is 21, the number of death will decrease and the road becomes more safer</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Driving-age-should-be-raised-to-21/3/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-04-30T12:34:53-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Murder is not right</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Murder-is-not-right/1/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Murder is not right. Imagine if someone killed you. Do you think that would be right. We should stop murder. Fast!!!</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Murder-is-not-right/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-04-09T21:32:02-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
