<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Debate.org: Debates in the Debating Period</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=3&amp;sort=1&amp;debating=true</link>
<description>Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T02:36:08-08:00</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>2013-05-19T02:36:08-08:00</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<title>Is 69 and 420 funny??</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-69-and-420-funny/1/</link>
<description>(Debating 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>2013-05-19T02:07:59-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Does Israel torture Palestinians?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Does-Israel-torture-Palestinians/2/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I've done this debate twice already but I haven't had a good debate in a while and I'm looking forward to one. I'd like to thank my opponent in advance and wish him luck.

Israel is the only country in the world whose judiciary has squarely faced the difficult issue of whether it is ever justified to engage in even a modified form of nonlethal torture unlike the current methods being used by the United States on captured al-Qaeda prisoners in order to obtain information deemed necessary to prevent a ticking bomb from killing dozens of civilians.

On September 6, 1999, the Israeli Supreme Court decided that not only is torture absolutely prohibited but even the types of physical pressure currently being used by the United States sleep deprivation, forced uncomfortable positions, loud music, shaking, hoods over the head are prohibited by Israeli law, even in cases in which the pressure is used not to elicit a confession but rather to elicit information that c</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Does-Israel-torture-Palestinians/2/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T01:34:07-08:00</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>
<item>
<title>My 4-Man Halo squad could defeat any 4 Man squad from Mass Effect 1,2, and/or 3</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/My-4-Man-Halo-squad-could-defeat-any-4-Man-squad-from-Mass-Effect-1-2-and-or-3/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I'd like to start by saying this is in a neutral battleground, this is not taking place in either universe, there are no MAC cannons and there are no Starships, only what the teams themselves have, including biotics and armors.

The group of Spartans John, Frederic, Kelly and Linda (Members of Blue Team) are far more capable of winning battles far superior to those of Spectre Shepard and His/Her squad.

The spartans are trained from the age of children, and only hand selected if they are physically and mentally superior. They are trained in not only hand to hand combat, they are also trained in eve kind of armed combat known to the human race so they can utilize weaponry of any species or type.

The team specifically has the highest tactical master of the time, John-117, his strategies are what win the wars. John has an immense mental capacity and ability to take in and play out a scenario to make the perfect strategy.

Kelly is the team's rabbit, she's</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/My-4-Man-Halo-squad-could-defeat-any-4-Man-squad-from-Mass-Effect-1-2-and-or-3/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:30:13-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Resolved: that there are moral absolutes.</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-that-there-are-moral-absolutes./1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;div&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;I set out to prove that there are moral absolutes. I&quot;ll use &quot;moral&quot; and &quot;ethical&quot; synonymously, choosing one over the other as style dictates. By &quot;absolute,&quot; I mean something is that true in all possible worlds, necessarily true, and true in all situations. For example, the judgment &quot;lying is wrong&quot; is necessarily true and there is no circumstance when lying is right.&quot;&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;My arguments are Kantian, so my opponent should be quite familiar with Kant's moral theory. I put no restrictions on the opponent, but be forewarned that I have a doctorate in philosophy, and I have taught for 25 years. I'm only trying to say that I have a good deal of practice and experience in this area.&lt;/span&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: small;&quot;&gt;Appeals to emotion and majority opinion are strongly discouraged, unless my opponent proves these have some value in proving the truth of his conclusions.&lt;/sp</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Resolved-that-there-are-moral-absolutes./1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:26:06-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Jesus was Jewish</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Jesus-was-Jewish/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) First round will be acceptance.

Rules:

Be civil

Use sources/ logic to support your contentions 

Wikipedia is NOT a source

Last round will be a summary of contentions and a bibliography of sources

Best of luck.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Jesus-was-Jewish/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:18:39-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Atheism Vs Christianity</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Atheism-Vs-Christianity/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) Make your arguments in this round!</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Atheism-Vs-Christianity/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:16:40-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>It is morally permissible to have masturbated on 9/11 in between the towers going down</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/It-is-morally-permissible-to-have-masturbated-on-9-11-in-between-the-towers-going-down/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) The full resolution is: &quot;Resolved: It is morally permissible to have masturbated on 9/11 2001 in between the two towers falling to the ground&quot; 

Clarifications:

1 - It is a given that said person who is masturbating is an american citizen who is living in the US and is fully aware of everything that is going on because he is watching the events on TV.

2 - It is a given that said person chose to masturbate in the time period from when the South tower collapsed to when the North tower collapsed. 

Rules: 
3 rounds
8000 characters
Con MUST GIVE ARGUMENTS IN ROUND 1
Only pictures of 9/11 are permissible, nothing relating to genitals though.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/It-is-morally-permissible-to-have-masturbated-on-9-11-in-between-the-towers-going-down/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:14:54-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Ontological and teleological arguments cannot accurately tell us whether God exists</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Ontological-and-teleological-arguments-cannot-accurately-tell-us-whether-God-exists/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;div&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-decoration: underline;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Why this debate?&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/span&gt;&amp;nbsp; Promenent theist apologists like William Lane Craig have spent tremendous amounts of effort polishing Ontological and Teleological arguments. I'd like to stop and ask the question - whether valid or not, does this type of argument reliably lead us to true conclusions and accurate knowledge in the first place?&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;text-decoration: underline;&quot;&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Resolved:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/span&gt; Ontological and teleological arguments cannot accurately&amp;nbsp;inform humans as to whether God exists&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;First Round is for acceptance.&lt;br /&gt;Second round opening statements.&lt;br /&gt;Third and fourth round are for rebuttals.&lt;br /&gt;No new arguments introduced in fourth round.&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Parties agree to use definitions as they appear in Merriam-Webster online dictionary:&lt;br /&gt;&lt;a href=&quot;http://www.merriam-webster.com/&quot;&gt;http://www.merriam-webster.com/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;Where there is</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Ontological-and-teleological-arguments-cannot-accurately-tell-us-whether-God-exists/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:08:02-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Dragonball Z/GT is Overrated</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Dragonball-Z-GT-is-Overrated/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) Greetings everyone. I recently joined this website and tried to make this argument, but decided to take it down. Now that I have learned a little more about how debates work on this website, I would like to challenge the community to prove to me that Dragonball Z and GT is not as overrated as I believe. I am open to changing the way I think about it, if you think you have the chops for it :)
Here are the rules:
-First Round Acceptance
-No New Arguments in the Last Round
-Anything from Dragonball Z and GT may be used as evidence, and putting links up to certain scenes is not only permitted but encouraged.
-The Dragonball Z movies may also be used.
To be clear, I will argue the Dragonball series is overrated, while my opponent will be arguing that it is worth all of the hype. Good Luck!!!!</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Dragonball-Z-GT-is-Overrated/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:07:37-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Barack Obama is a bad president.</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Barack-Obama-is-a-bad-president./1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) First round is acceptance.
Good Luck.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Barack-Obama-is-a-bad-president./1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-19T00:05:18-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Tap water (Pro) Bottled water (con)</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Tap-water-Pro-Bottled-water-con/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;div&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: 12pt;&quot;&gt;Burden of proof is shared. First round will be arguments, the following rounds will be rebuttals.&lt;br /&gt; &lt;br /&gt; Some definitions:&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: 12pt;&quot;&gt;&lt;br /&gt; Bottled water: Drinking water packaged in plastic or glass and sold as a commodity&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: 12pt;&quot;&gt;Tap water: Potable water supplied to taps&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: 12pt;&quot;&gt;1. Carbon footprint&lt;/span&gt;&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: 12pt;&quot;&gt;1/5 of plastic bottles from the bottled water do not get recycled. [1] To manufacture these bottles, 47 million gallons of oil are used per year. [2] Even more fuel are needed to send them from the manufacturing plant to the town you live in, and still more to move them from the warehouse to your local grocery store. &lt;/span&gt;&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;span style=&quot;font-size: 12pt;&quot;&gt;Using tap water means less demand for non-reusable bottles, which means that less bott</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Tap-water-Pro-Bottled-water-con/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T23:11:14-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Should children be taught a code of morales anymore?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Should-children-be-taught-a-code-of-morales-anymore/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) Since are advancement into technology and the gaining efficiency of techy stuff, I seem to have noticed a change in the elementary and middle school kids. They seem to not care about anyone or anything, but at the same time, they seem to be having a good time, reveling in the kind of stuff that middle schoolers and elementary schoolers do today. So the question really is, should kids be left alone, or do we have to teach them stuff now more than ever? For disclosure, Im on the &quot;Teach the kids morals part.&quot;
Rules: Okay, no bashing, its my first time, but a small snarky remark is good for the debate once in a while.
Please give a good reason
Let's just have fun with this, come on.
Please no useage of innapropriate language.
With that, I wish the opponent luck.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Should-children-be-taught-a-code-of-morales-anymore/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T21:58:00-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>A Perfect Being Can Exist</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/A-Perfect-Being-Can-Exist/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) &lt;p&gt;The Rules:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;No swearing.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;No slander.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;No insult to character.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The Debate Format:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol&gt;
&lt;li&gt;The opponent will immediately begin with a rebuttal, and it will be counter-arguments and rebuttals from then on.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;strong&gt;My Argument&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;br /&gt;&lt;br /&gt;1. A perfect being exists.&lt;br /&gt;2. The perfect being has free will.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol style=&quot;list-style-type: lower-alpha;&quot;&gt;
&lt;li&gt;The ability to be evil or good.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;3. The perfect being creates outside of itself, the universe.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol style=&quot;list-style-type: lower-alpha;&quot;&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Because the perfect being has free will, His creation too has the potential for free will within it.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;li&gt;Both the perfect being and His creation are separate entities, separate beings. Same perfection, different nature.&lt;/li&gt;
&lt;/ol&gt;
&lt;p&gt;4. The universe is perfect, and is made up of perfect parts.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;ol style=&quot;list-style-type: lower-alpha;&quot;&gt;
&lt;li</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/A-Perfect-Being-Can-Exist/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T21:37:23-08:00</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>Splitting of the USA</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Splitting-of-the-USA/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I believe that everything from GA to Texas should break away including Oklahoma and everything up to Kentucky. This would be called Dixie.
I believe that I should be the Commander of Dixie.
My opponent may choose which topics he would like to discuss.
(We will assume that a peace treaty between Dixie and the Yankees is in effect. War betweeen the nations is not an issue that I would like to be included.)
Any issue, but war between the nations, will be considered.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Splitting-of-the-USA/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T19:56:21-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>swag is sooooo lame</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/swag-is-sooooo-lame/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) why is there such thing as SWAG? it doesn't get you a job, its dumb, and its pretty much another trend society just pooped out</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/swag-is-sooooo-lame/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T19:32:38-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Is Illuminati a real organization?</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-Illuminati-a-real-organization/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) I think, Illuminati is real. They're in everywhere! The world is controlling by this organization. They want to control our brains with some subliminal messages. The nuclear power, money, international companies, banks, wars (for example: September 11)....</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Is-Illuminati-a-real-organization/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T18:13:24-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>EPL is better than Primera Liga</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/EPL-is-better-than-Primera-Liga/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) First of all,
Constrating to Only REAL MADRID &amp; BARCELONA dominate Primera Liga,
in English Premier League there are no absolute dominacteur or dominee.
It means, there is potential and sustainable development in class of league

Second,
EPL's marketing ability is really better than Primera Liga,
Wherever We can pick up a remote controller, we can see any match of EPL!
but in case of Primera Liga, it doesn't .
and EPL's camera skill for shooting the match is absolutely dominant Primera Liga's

Don't you think about this?</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/EPL-is-better-than-Primera-Liga/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T17:28:46-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Competitive Writing: Kenny Marshall is far less lucky than George Anderson</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Competitive-Writing-Kenny-Marshall-is-far-less-lucky-than-George-Anderson/1/</link>
<description>(Debating Period) This debate is quite simple, both sides must attempt to establish a story about their character, either Kenny Garret or George Anderson in which they provide evidence that their character is less lucky. Round 1 must be written in first person, round 2 in the form of a play script, 3 in verse, 4 in third person prose, and 5 to the tune of a popular song. In addition, each round must include at least two oxymorons.

This is the tale of Kenny Garret, the Canadian who had such a peculiar case of bad luck that should you choose to return to the smoldering crater that now covers his hometown and speak his name, you would soon find yourself stoned to death by the locals because of their great fear that his name alone will curse them all. If you were to go to the town of Wallburg in central Kansas and asked about him, you would soon learn from the few survivors there that he lived in Kansas from age 11 to 16 and while there, Wallburg became the only town to be hit by</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Competitive-Writing-Kenny-Marshall-is-far-less-lucky-than-George-Anderson/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2013-05-18T17:27:32-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
