I don't think DC should become a state. It's better if D.C. is a strictly neutral place and wasn't part of any one state, including itself. What would being a state do to D.C.?
Why does it have to be in French? It's going to make it very hard to vote on it unless either the judges know french or put it in google translate. Even if they do number 2, google translate only allows so many characters at a time.
NASA currently gets $19 billion annually. I think once we get our debt paid off, this can go to around $200 billion per year. Hopefully they colonize the moon with it and get the natural resources from it.
Under our current means of electing presidents, whoever wins the majority of support gets an entire term to themselves. If the Democrats get 60% of the vote +- 5 percentage points, then they are always going to win the white house, even though many people don't support them. Under the pie chart method, if you win 60% of the votes, your representative gets to be in office for 60% of a term. This way, democracy doesn't become tyranny of the majority, since every party can get representation. I predict the Dems or the GOP will reliably win elections in the future, so both left leaning and right leaning people need representation in government.
American samoa is too far from Hawaii to be part of that state. I would merge the US islands and Puerto Rico. I would let the Dakotas be seperate states. They are too different and what´s the point of merging them? I would abolish all native reservations. They keep the natives too poor and there would be more investment to the regions if the native territory was part of the US.
I think that the suicide rate by a gun is comparable to suicide by jumping off a bridge, although I’m not sure. If the death rate is comparable, then taking away guns would encourage more people to jump off of a bridge, which is more painful.
>>It is easier to kill yourself with a gun than it is with a knife. A knife requires a slash. If a person feels the pain of the slash and decides to let go. They might still be saved whereas a shot to the head is almost always death.
Knifes are less effective then guns. Guns kill quicker and can kill from a distance. I much rather have less people die then for some to die painfully.
I was primarily thinking about suicide from a gun versus suicide from jumping off of a building or something. Once you jump, there is no going back. It takes effort to do either. Death by fractured limbs is more painful than death by gunshot. People who are suicidal will find creative ways to kill themselves if they have the will to do it.
>>Men equal facial hair and women equal long hair. These are based on the society which is why it is a social construct. Both the label and gender is a social construct.
There are other differences between men and women other than their hair styles. Men on average have more muscle, they tend to run faster and punch harder. This is due to a testosterone advantage that men have over women 42 fold.
>>Man and woman are social construct because gender is a social construct.
Not accurate.
>> It is labels we ascribe to things like chairs. tables etc.
Language is a social construct, but gender isin´t. All labels and all words are social constructs, but the concept of gender, rather than the actual word is not a social construct.
Gender is not a social construct, so dynasty was right about that. The NIH confirms various differences between men and women. If gender were a social construct, then why would transgenders be commiting suicide over something that they believe is a nominal difference; gender/sex?
>>Do you have evidence for this solution?
It´s like saying that working out will make you better at sports. Is it hard? Yes. Do most people not want to do it? Yes. If you want to change from LGBT to straight and cis, just as if an out of shape person could become in shape, is it possible with effort? Yes. I don´t want to make conversion therapy required under law, but it definitely should be an option for adults that consent for religious reasons or any other reason.
>>You are too busy ragging on something instead of spending some time to actually find a solution
My solution is getting the transgenders mental help with their condition so they are less likely to commit suicide. It's the condition of being transgender that has caused so many to commit or attempt suicide, not how society treats them. The West treats them pretty good if all they have to worry about is misgendering on the basis of belief. The notion that some states would punish people for misgendering on the basis of belief is truly fascist.
I think the suicide rate would fall more if transgenders were encouraged to get rehabilitation rather than just acceptance. What is the difference between transgenderism and gender dysphoria? Men and women shouldn’t be changed because it is not scientifically accurate and gender is not a social construct.
The reason why the transgender suicide rate is so high is because transgenderism is a disorder that transgenders should try to treat. Similar disorders are bipolar disorder, which claims a comparable percentage of it´s victims. In societies where transgenderism is accepted, the suicide rate barely falls compared to where it´s not accepted.
According to your Pew source, 97% of gun deaths in the US exist because of suicide or murder. If you ban guns, people who want to commit suicide will find other, more painful ways to kill themselves. People who want to murder will commit stabbings as we have seen in the U.K and stabbings are more painful than getting shot in the head. The U.K and Jamaica banned guns and their homicide rates skyrocketed.
The 2nd amendment wasn't even made to reduce homicide. It was about protecting ourselves from the biggest mass shooter in history; a mass shooter that has slaughtered 100 million people in the 20th century; tyrannical governments. If you don´t think a tyrannical government will attack the disarmed, what is Donald Trump doing to illegal immigrants, who don´t have guns to protect themselves? Would he deport the 11 million illegal immigrants if they had guns to protect themselves?
"If my job were to end people's lives on a daily basis, I'd imagine that scary movies wouldn't do much to alleviate the psychological torment of actually experiencing someone eaten by carnivorous fish."
Some people can handle it better then others. You might not be able to execute a mass murderer in this way, but some people lack the empathy to get PTSD. Since the executioners would be used to being scared of things, they would probably get used to it and would therefore be less likely to get PTSD. If necessary, a robot could be made to be able to deal with executions.
"If it worked so well, we would have been subjecting soldiers to "The Shining" years before active service to stave off PTSD."
What are the Shining years?
"There is a severe disconnect between contrived, virtual violence and real executions of living, breathing people."
You might be right. Since most murderers only murder 1 to 2 people, my piranha fish execution method would only be used for people like Dylan Roof, that have destroyed many lives and many families. Since few executioners would deal with such executions, most wouldn't get PTSD. Do you know what percentage of executioners get PTSD?
"This isn't even mentioning the constitutional challenges that would emerge."
The 8th amendment, prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment doesn't have to be overturned. There are many places that execute people for more trivial things, like being gay or committing adultery. Executing a mass murderer, even if that method is painful, isin't unusual and it isin't unjustifiably cruel.
** Nope. There is something uniquely different about a zygote (embryo)-- when uninterrupted a zygote will continue to develop along the human life continuum. **
An uninterrupted sperm cell will form a zygote if in a woman. Does this mean that we should ban things that prevent sperm from reaching eggs? If you say yes, it would ban birth control, but it would also ban abstinence since that also prevents sperm from reaching an egg.
** Again, what most institutions, at least the Catholic Church anyway, opposes is what is done to get certain stem cells -- the embryo (human life) is destroyed. If there was a way to use embryonic stem cells in such a way that it doesn't harm or destroy that embryo (human life), I and the Church would be all for it. **
We have separation of church and state. I don't know too much about stem cell research to have an opinion on it.
** I believe that Birth Control, rather then "reduce abortions or pregnancies", does the opposite. **
If you google abortion rates and look at the charts for it, as birth control use has been going up, abortion rates have been falling. It is because of birth control that I predict that abortions will no longer have to be used by 2030.
** It removes a sense of "responsibility" when it comes to sex. **
Does there have to be a sense of responsibility? One night of sex shouldn't correspond to 18 years of responsibility. Granted, killing the kid after 6 weeks ought to be banned. But preventing a kid from being conceived; seems alright. The women are cool with having sex generally provided they don't get pregnant. If the woman consents and she doesn't get pregnant or transmit any STDs, then I would let people have sex and it doesn't oppress women. Granted, I would require birth control to be used that is 100% effective to prevent pregnancies.
I don't think DC should become a state. It's better if D.C. is a strictly neutral place and wasn't part of any one state, including itself. What would being a state do to D.C.?
Why does it have to be in French? It's going to make it very hard to vote on it unless either the judges know french or put it in google translate. Even if they do number 2, google translate only allows so many characters at a time.
Canada isin't a good place for solar, but why can't they use wind? I wouldn't force people to use it, but wind seems viable for a place like Canada.
NASA currently gets $19 billion annually. I think once we get our debt paid off, this can go to around $200 billion per year. Hopefully they colonize the moon with it and get the natural resources from it.
I don´t want welfare for anybody, so I would agree with your statement regarding this.
If PR became a state, then more voluntary investment would come to the island and less welfare would be necessary.
Under our current means of electing presidents, whoever wins the majority of support gets an entire term to themselves. If the Democrats get 60% of the vote +- 5 percentage points, then they are always going to win the white house, even though many people don't support them. Under the pie chart method, if you win 60% of the votes, your representative gets to be in office for 60% of a term. This way, democracy doesn't become tyranny of the majority, since every party can get representation. I predict the Dems or the GOP will reliably win elections in the future, so both left leaning and right leaning people need representation in government.
If we get rid of the electoral college, we need the pie chart method too to elect our presidents.
How much money would you dedicate?
How much?
NASA currently gets $19 billion per year. Would you increase this? If so, by how much?
American samoa is too far from Hawaii to be part of that state. I would merge the US islands and Puerto Rico. I would let the Dakotas be seperate states. They are too different and what´s the point of merging them? I would abolish all native reservations. They keep the natives too poor and there would be more investment to the regions if the native territory was part of the US.
I think Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Mariana Islands should become states. Thoughts?
Have evidence that a gun is more likely to create suicide than jumping off a bridge?
I don’t know.
I am a pro life libertarian as of the time of this comment.
A gun has a high chance of killing someone, but jumping off a bridge has a high chance of causing death too.
I think that the suicide rate by a gun is comparable to suicide by jumping off a bridge, although I’m not sure. If the death rate is comparable, then taking away guns would encourage more people to jump off of a bridge, which is more painful.
A smart gun would solve the gun debate, but I don´t think they exist yet. Maybe the NRA could receive funds to develop a smart gun.
>>It is easier to kill yourself with a gun than it is with a knife. A knife requires a slash. If a person feels the pain of the slash and decides to let go. They might still be saved whereas a shot to the head is almost always death.
Knifes are less effective then guns. Guns kill quicker and can kill from a distance. I much rather have less people die then for some to die painfully.
I was primarily thinking about suicide from a gun versus suicide from jumping off of a building or something. Once you jump, there is no going back. It takes effort to do either. Death by fractured limbs is more painful than death by gunshot. People who are suicidal will find creative ways to kill themselves if they have the will to do it.
>>Men equal facial hair and women equal long hair. These are based on the society which is why it is a social construct. Both the label and gender is a social construct.
There are other differences between men and women other than their hair styles. Men on average have more muscle, they tend to run faster and punch harder. This is due to a testosterone advantage that men have over women 42 fold.
>>Man and woman are social construct because gender is a social construct.
Not accurate.
>> It is labels we ascribe to things like chairs. tables etc.
Language is a social construct, but gender isin´t. All labels and all words are social constructs, but the concept of gender, rather than the actual word is not a social construct.
Gender is not a social construct, so dynasty was right about that. The NIH confirms various differences between men and women. If gender were a social construct, then why would transgenders be commiting suicide over something that they believe is a nominal difference; gender/sex?
>>Do you have evidence for this solution?
It´s like saying that working out will make you better at sports. Is it hard? Yes. Do most people not want to do it? Yes. If you want to change from LGBT to straight and cis, just as if an out of shape person could become in shape, is it possible with effort? Yes. I don´t want to make conversion therapy required under law, but it definitely should be an option for adults that consent for religious reasons or any other reason.
>>You are too busy ragging on something instead of spending some time to actually find a solution
My solution is getting the transgenders mental help with their condition so they are less likely to commit suicide. It's the condition of being transgender that has caused so many to commit or attempt suicide, not how society treats them. The West treats them pretty good if all they have to worry about is misgendering on the basis of belief. The notion that some states would punish people for misgendering on the basis of belief is truly fascist.
I think the suicide rate would fall more if transgenders were encouraged to get rehabilitation rather than just acceptance. What is the difference between transgenderism and gender dysphoria? Men and women shouldn’t be changed because it is not scientifically accurate and gender is not a social construct.
The reason why the transgender suicide rate is so high is because transgenderism is a disorder that transgenders should try to treat. Similar disorders are bipolar disorder, which claims a comparable percentage of it´s victims. In societies where transgenderism is accepted, the suicide rate barely falls compared to where it´s not accepted.
At first I thought you said, ¨Azerbaijan is greater than America, as of now.¨
Bumping so I can be respond later.
I think the Hong Kongers should move to the US where they belong for their own safety.
Depends on the criminal. I wouldn’t let a felon convict vote.
Why did Yitzgoldberg get blocked?
According to your Pew source, 97% of gun deaths in the US exist because of suicide or murder. If you ban guns, people who want to commit suicide will find other, more painful ways to kill themselves. People who want to murder will commit stabbings as we have seen in the U.K and stabbings are more painful than getting shot in the head. The U.K and Jamaica banned guns and their homicide rates skyrocketed.
The 2nd amendment wasn't even made to reduce homicide. It was about protecting ourselves from the biggest mass shooter in history; a mass shooter that has slaughtered 100 million people in the 20th century; tyrannical governments. If you don´t think a tyrannical government will attack the disarmed, what is Donald Trump doing to illegal immigrants, who don´t have guns to protect themselves? Would he deport the 11 million illegal immigrants if they had guns to protect themselves?
I agree with many of his policies and he isin't a jackass like Trump.
DART asks for your religion, not your ethnicity.
My profile pick is Joe Walsh. He´s a GOP candidate that is challenging Trump for presidency.
How can you be jewish and atheist at the same time? It´s like saying that your religious and atheist at the same time.
Your profile says your still jewish.
7 year olds don´t deserve special treatment.
I agree with you on this.
What should I post? Should this debate end in a tie?
I think Virt will win, although I don't know too much about the Torah.
Bump.
4 days left.
Bump. 4 days left.
"If my job were to end people's lives on a daily basis, I'd imagine that scary movies wouldn't do much to alleviate the psychological torment of actually experiencing someone eaten by carnivorous fish."
Some people can handle it better then others. You might not be able to execute a mass murderer in this way, but some people lack the empathy to get PTSD. Since the executioners would be used to being scared of things, they would probably get used to it and would therefore be less likely to get PTSD. If necessary, a robot could be made to be able to deal with executions.
"If it worked so well, we would have been subjecting soldiers to "The Shining" years before active service to stave off PTSD."
What are the Shining years?
"There is a severe disconnect between contrived, virtual violence and real executions of living, breathing people."
You might be right. Since most murderers only murder 1 to 2 people, my piranha fish execution method would only be used for people like Dylan Roof, that have destroyed many lives and many families. Since few executioners would deal with such executions, most wouldn't get PTSD. Do you know what percentage of executioners get PTSD?
"This isn't even mentioning the constitutional challenges that would emerge."
The 8th amendment, prohibiting cruel and unusual punishment doesn't have to be overturned. There are many places that execute people for more trivial things, like being gay or committing adultery. Executing a mass murderer, even if that method is painful, isin't unusual and it isin't unjustifiably cruel.
It would be a bunch of insults, but very funny to read.
What about Iran?
You are correct sir.
** Nope. There is something uniquely different about a zygote (embryo)-- when uninterrupted a zygote will continue to develop along the human life continuum. **
An uninterrupted sperm cell will form a zygote if in a woman. Does this mean that we should ban things that prevent sperm from reaching eggs? If you say yes, it would ban birth control, but it would also ban abstinence since that also prevents sperm from reaching an egg.
** Again, what most institutions, at least the Catholic Church anyway, opposes is what is done to get certain stem cells -- the embryo (human life) is destroyed. If there was a way to use embryonic stem cells in such a way that it doesn't harm or destroy that embryo (human life), I and the Church would be all for it. **
We have separation of church and state. I don't know too much about stem cell research to have an opinion on it.
** I believe that Birth Control, rather then "reduce abortions or pregnancies", does the opposite. **
If you google abortion rates and look at the charts for it, as birth control use has been going up, abortion rates have been falling. It is because of birth control that I predict that abortions will no longer have to be used by 2030.
** It removes a sense of "responsibility" when it comes to sex. **
Does there have to be a sense of responsibility? One night of sex shouldn't correspond to 18 years of responsibility. Granted, killing the kid after 6 weeks ought to be banned. But preventing a kid from being conceived; seems alright. The women are cool with having sex generally provided they don't get pregnant. If the woman consents and she doesn't get pregnant or transmit any STDs, then I would let people have sex and it doesn't oppress women. Granted, I would require birth control to be used that is 100% effective to prevent pregnancies.
If cancer was somehow harmless to a woman, would killing the cancer if it never develops into a human being be classified as a felony?