Total posts: 12,563
Do I want for the world to be ruled by Putin?
Of course not. Only a crazy person would want that.
Do I want for the world to be ruled by USA? Of course not. USA is ruled by idiots who cant separate whats right from whats ideology.
Now, the third option might be China, which is worse than USA and Russia combined.
So it seems that in this battle, good guys cannot win because there are no good guys.
Literally, this is just one evil fighting with the other evil.
Good isnt even involved in this battle. So its not a battle of good vs evil, as media tries to paint it.
The battle is evil vs evil. So one of those evils will win.
Good cannot win, because there is no good.
Created:
Posted in:
As a president of this site and viceroy of Wylted, I agree that site's name should change, but not to that...
They already have sites where people whine all the time. For example, therapy sites - people whine a lot there to the point where its unbearable and impossible not to troll those people.
I suggest our site changes name to "Debater.com" or something similar with click bait title. "DebateArt" is simply not click bait. The only reason I found debateart is because Debate.org shut down and I looked for another debate site.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
Though, I think dropping atom bombs on Japan is one of the lesser immoral options, beating the prolonging of Japanese warfare for several years by a long margin.
Now Russia will use that as an argument to nuke Ukraine.
Created:
-->
@zedvictor4
Throughout my whole childhood and teenage years I never knew or heard of any transgender children.
They existed, just were afraid to come out.
In 1980 to 1990 and before, if child came out as homosexual, child would be thrown out of the house and be homeless, forced to live in shelters or in the street. Thats why LGBT made shelters for children who were thrown out of the house for being LGBT.
Times are different now, but just 40 years ago, being gay or LGBT was an entirely different story.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
I know. Europe is divided on trans community problems.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
In terms of functionality,Everything,Is heterosexually based
Not happiness. Some people are much happier with same sex than with opposite sex.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Greyparrot
Asexuals just wanna be left the hell alone and don't care about parades with flopping genitals or fighting for a special status.
Well, asexuals are often ridiculed by their friends. Its the problem of structure in groups. If you want to be friends with certain group of people, you have to talk about sexual stuff sooner or later. Sexuals usually try to impose sexuality on asexuals by using provocations and laughing. Its very uncomfortable for asexuals. I am not sure if asexuals come to parades, but I am rather sure that they want for society to understand better what does it mean to be asexual.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Mps1213
Aren’t you the same person that says “increasing life” is the most important part of society not individual freedom?
The problem with me is that I change my mind often.
Created:
-->
@Mps1213
The US did not “run out of ammo”
Biden said it did. Are you saying that Biden lied?
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@leelee2230
Why can't we all accept the fact that people are beautiful in there own way?
I guess its because bullying is more fun for the bully.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@zedvictor4
Let's keep it inclusive and add an H for heterosexual.
Hmmm... well, the LGBT disagrees, although B technically includes heterosexual who is also homosexual.
Created:
-->
@FLRW
God has a message for you.
Maybe hearing God's words will change your mind about God.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@oromagi
TWS, you keep saying that your bigotry has not been substantiated on this site but you are the only one who believes that and you are a fool. Just as you assumed the other day that a French teenager was a criminal and an immigrant and a drug addict based exclusively on your misperception of skin color, your hasty generalizations about all LGBTQIA+ is a perfect example of how you lump every OTHER you're too dumb to relate to into some kind of frightening enemy. Not all LGBTQIA+ think the same about Trans people. Hell, look at Jerry Falwell. Let's agree that heretoforward it is a sufficiently established fact that TWS1405 is a bigot and a racist. The only thing that change that fact is TWS.
I have highlighted the personal attacks that you used above.
As DebateArt president, I have to urge you not to use these personal attacks anymore, and to stick to the topic instead.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
The comments are about themselves or their siblings or vest friends. I doubt they are phobic.
They already intentionally misgendered the person in the video. Also, I dont know if you knew this or not, but people in YouTube comments often lie to prove a point. Most of those people are bullies. Statistically, they have to be. About 80% of society consists of bullies. So 80% of people in those comments are likely bullies. They are same people who would just look away when trans child is bullied. They are people who would bully trans children by telling them that they cant be a girl. And thats just the start of the story. Countless examples of trans children being bullied, ridiculed, insulted... In fact, trans people are much more likely to be victims of violence, sexual abuse, abuse at workplace, abuse in school. Coming out as trans causes a person to be treated worse, but trans people still come out because they are fighting so that future generations can live better.
Final and Sweden are progressive and banned puberty blockers despite being pioneers of it.
Well, if you think Sweden is right, go live in Sweden.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
I agree with your point about society being bad if no one cared. I believe thats why our society today is bad.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
You don’t have to care about that if you don’t want to
I dont think caring is a choice. For example, I often wanted to stop caring, but simply couldnt. I see all the people in the world, most of them are psychopaths who care about nothing except power. I always wondered how they could do that. How did they simply turn off caring? I cannot do that. The caring always prevails in my mind. Its like I am programmed to care about all human problems. I wonder why God didnt program other people the same way. Seems kinda unfair that "care" is distributed unequally.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Point is, a boy playing with dolls should not justify robbing him of puberty
This society robbed children of many things. Therefore, this society has no right in saying what is justified. That would be like saying that Hitler has a say in what is justified.
Reading transphobic comments will not really give you the answer to anything. Those comments are just causing people to continue misgendering others.
For example, the video is about a girl, not about a boy. Therefore, those comments couldnt even tell gender of someone after it was being explained to them.
Girl wasnt robbed of puberty. Just started puberty as a girl, which is right because she is a girl.
Created:
-->
@RationalMadman
Read the comments
I dont usually read comments on YouTube.
Plenty of examples of parents bullying their children into suicide, and then those same parents blaming trans people for everything.
This is what happens when you have sick society. Society abuses children, then blames someone else for results.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@FLRW
But they do feel pain when they are killed.
They feel pain even before being killed. In factory farming, animals are abused and often beaten. Many animals also get run over by a car and are left to die on the road. But humans are selfish creatures, so humans dont care.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Bella3sp
Just like going to the doctor for shots, you may not want to, but usually parent's do that to protect you. Not with malice thought.
What is done to an individual must be in the interest of that individual, by law of autonomy.
I dont think that we can say how parents denying children from being what they want to be is in the interest of those children.
I see many parents call their transgirl a boy. They refuse to address their child in a way child wants to be addressed. They refuse to allow their transgirl to wear a dress. They refuse to tell their children that they can choose to be any gender they want. They want to ban others from giving their children proper education. Such parents are violating child's autonomy.
Created:
I would recommend everyone to watch this video,
the entire video please:
It is about a transgirl, age 14, who was bullied a lot because of the same opinion that many people are currently spreading around.
People bullied her, simply because she wanted to look like a girl. Even adults bullied her. She was very happy after transitioning and receiving hormones. Now she looks like a girl and she is much happier.
Before transitioning, other kids ridiculed her, laughed at her, rejected her and bullied her. Adults also laughed at her.
That is what most trans people have to go through in their early childhood. Thats what harms them the most.
When society laughs at you, it hurts.
When society rejects you, it hurts.
Children need to be protected from bullying that happens everywhere because adults make fun of adults, and then children copy adults, and children make fun of children. Bullying of trans adults results in bullying of trans children.
Children are sensitive to bullying. Trans children are bullied the most. Bullying leaves scars that never heal, and this society promotes bullying of trans individuals the most.
Many trans people are bullied online. Such bullying is not only cruel, but it inspires others to bully trans people, to bully trans children.
Trans community agrees that children should be allowed to transition, and should never be bullied.
Stop with the bullying, for the sake of trans children.
You are not helping anyone with your bullying, but you are hurting trans children so much.
Trans people shouldnt be bullied. Trans people deserve to be happy, like everyone else.
Trans people are my friends. I wont let you hurt them.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Then you are not a moral person capable of carrying out moral actions regardless of their effect.
Why does morality have to include everyone else? Why cant morality be so that only I have meaning, and that all my decisions and actions are only for my own personal benefit?
It seems that you hold an opinion that right and wrong means to consider everyone as equally valuable. However, how can I consider someone different from me to be equally valuable? Surely, that would harm me in a situation where I have to give up on myself to uphold the other person's wellbeing.
Created:
Posted in:
@TWS
I would recommend you to watch this video, the entire video please:
It is about a transgirl, 14, who was bullied a lot because of the same opinion that you are currently spreading around. People bullied her, simply because she wanted to look like a girl. She was very happy after transitioning and receiving hormones. Now she looks like a girl and she is happier.
Before transitioning, other kids ridiculed her, laughed at her, and rejected her. That is what most trans people have to go through in their early childhood. Thats what harms them. When society laughs at you, it hurts. When society rejects you, it hurts. Children need to be protected from bullying, that happens everywhere because adults make fun of adults and then children make fun of children.
Children are sensitive to bullying. Trans children are bullied the most. Bullying leaves scars that never heal, and this society promotes bullying.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Ownership isn't necessarily identical to control
The entire point of being an owner of your body is that other people cannot control it, that is, that other people cannot decide what you do with your body. The moment other people get to decide what someone does with his own body, is when the ownership is violated.
Some children dont reach adulthood, so denying them the ownership of their body means making them slaves for their entire life.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
I have a theory of objective ethics, and I suspect that there is a lower age where almost no child could truly understand it. That is the absolute minimum for the age of maturity.
Sorry, but you dont get to decide when someone owns his own body and when not. Also, there is no point at which you own a person. Even if person doesnt know anything, it still stands that you dont own that person. Therefore, there is no point at which you can make decisions regarding someone else's body.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
In any case, children will jump out a window with a sheet as a parachute and even though there is no guarantee they'll ever grow out of that lack of rationality at least for that time their liberty is not yet justified.
I wouldnt exactly compare boy changing to girl and wearing a dress and make up to be equal to jumping out a window.
This is also an extreme example of "using their body", we're not talking about climbing a tree or masturbating. This is the permanent mutilation that destroys many primal functions of the human body.
Now that is where you have a right to deny them of surgery.
Let me put it this way. Child's body is owned by that child. However, no one is forced to provide a child with surgery. Surgery requires the consent of both child and adult who does the surgery. Therefore, child cannot force an adult to perform surgery on a child.
However, if child is a boy and changes to a girl, and has money and buys a dress, I dont see why would anyone ban that child from wearing a dress. I dont see why would anyone address that child any differently than what that child wants to be addressed.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
If you however don’t care whether a stranger comes up to you and kills you
What if I only value my own life, while considering lives of others to be meaningless?
Created:
Posted in:
@TWS
The child doesn’t know any better.
You dont know that. You just assume. But even if that was true, it still wouldnt allow you to own child's body and make decisions regarding it.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@ADreamOfLiberty
Refusing to indulge in a childs dangerous fantasy is not forcing anything on them besides what reality would eventually.
Denying a child the use of own body is forcing your will on the child. Forcing your will on the child is making that child a slave. Slavery is harmful. Therefore, denying a child the use of own body is harmful.
Unless you are ready to give up all your rights for the sake of safety, I suggest you dont deny rights of others for the sake of safety.
After all, if someone is willingly doing something that you find dangerous, then you have no right to stop them. They arent hurting others. However, you denying others the right to own body is what is harming others.
Even if you believe that someone will be forced anyway by some "reality", forcing them does not negate the force. However, it puts the blame for the force on you.
Created:
Posted in:
@TWS
Adults and ONLY adults have the right to their own bodies.
Children have the right to own their own bodies. Child's body does not belong to anyone other than the child.
To say any different, would be to literally support slavery.
Adults do NOT have any "right" to force their debauchery onto non-adults.
So you have no right to force a child to be a boy if a child wants to be a girl.
Created:
Posted in:
Oh no, you blocked me 🥺
I sad now.
Created:
Posted in:
People have a right to do whatever they want with their bodies. If that bothers you, you are part of the problem.
Humans are not slaves. Therefore, person is not owned by another person. No one can tell that person what to do with own body.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@YouFound_Lxam
But why are those things wrong, and not good?
I already said that I dont know the answer to that. I dont think there is an answer. The only way you could answer it is by using God as an answer. However, some people dont believe in God. So for them, its not a valid answer.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
Science provides the most probable answer with the evidence and logic it has, which may be flawed, but can always be improved.
I agree that it can always be improved. However, it was not yet improved to perfection. What is not perfect, is flawed. However, in terms of morality, there will always be many disagreements due to different people having different values. Science cannot really decide which value is the best, since every person can choose his own value and have different morality based on that value. Science may teach certain morality, but the question is if that will be as effective as religious teaching. Person can have selfish morality, oriented entirely around that person, without consideration for the wellbeing of others.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Barney
while your syllogism is flawed, your conclusion about net negatives is quite a good point.
Pain net negatives are just one of the problems with child birth. The other problem is personal responsibility for causing pain in the world. One more problem is money. Children are expensive and demanding. Kindergarten costs 3000$ a month.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@n8nrgim
i imagine Oprah Winfrey when i see this thread... "everyone gets an abortion! you get an abortion! and you get an abortion! and you get an abortion! abortions for everyone!"
Well, abortions, castrations, condoms and what not.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@SkepticalOne
If you could make a case that there would be significantly more pain than happiness, then maybe I could be persuaded.
That depends on what you mean by "significantly more pain".
If you mean that the happiness of eating a cheeseburger or having sex outweights pain of being crushed by a car, raped or whatever, then there is really nothing to argue there.
I simply hold position that not having happiness and not having pain is better than having happiness and having lots of pain.
As long as you hold an assumption that happiness outweights pain in the world, you will end up justifying child birth if you take that for your moral value.
However, the truth is that your position is utterly immoral.
My position: "Everyone should abort", means that I am not causing more pain than I am removing. My position is universal. It would literally prevent suffering of not just humans, but also animals. It also means that I am not causing more pain, therefore not having moral guilt.
Your position could, at best, argue that average happiness outweights average pain. However, even if that was true, it would still be immoral because there are individuals with pain that far outweights their happiness. Therefore, your position would be forced to argue that causing extreme pain to someone is good if it makes someone else happy. So not a very universal position, or even a morally sound one.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
This means that science is not just a body of facts, but a method of obtaining facts through empirical and rational means.
Method that can be wrong. Method that made mistakes before.
Facts can be wrong or incomplete, but that does not mean that science is wrong or incomplete.
Actually, it does. If science is "study of the structure and behavior of the physical and natural world...", study can be incomplete or wrong. Therefore, science, being study, can be incomplete or wrong.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
There are different kinds of consequentialism that have different goals for the outcome, such as human happiness, individual pleasure, specific results like money or life, and so on.
That was my original point. Accepting different values produces different conclusions, even if both cases use consequentialism.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
Science is a way of finding out things, and knowledge is what we find out. Sometimes, what we find out is wrong or incomplete. That does not mean that science is wrong or incomplete. It means that we need to use science more carefully and correctly to improve our knowledge. Do you see the difference?
Way of finding out things can also be wrong or deceptive. However, definition of science is "body of facts". Facts can be wrong, that is, incorrect things can be labeled as facts.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
In the previous example you explained how some people only refrain from doing evil out of the fear of God, that too does not eliminate the desire to do harm or evil. While I recognize your correlation, I do not believe you represent religion as any better.
I was just giving the answer as to what role religion plays. If society is better with or without religion, I would say that whats better simply depends on what person prefers. There is no denying that religion causes unpleasant things, such as children fearing God because adults have scared them.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
Consequentialism is not entirely different from those who place value on human life, or prevention of pain, or increase of happiness.
It actually is.
For example, sometimes to reduce pain, one must destroy life.
By causing life, one causes pain.
Also, often happiness and pain are in contradiction. Aborting a fetus destroys its future happiness, but also reduces pain.
Therefore, choosing life over preventing pain results in entirely different conclusions. Choosing to prevent pain over choosing to not reduce happiness also results in different conclusions about what the right action is.
There are many values, such as autonomy, justice...ect. Each value results in different moral conclusions.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Double_R
Why is killing someone else wrong? Well, do you want to be killed? If not, there’s your answer.
Thats not a logical answer. Thats just you assuming that two different people are same person. Its just an appeal to virtue of justice.
Morality isn’t a product of our instinct to survive, our survival is a product of our inherent moral system.
So you reject teleology, that says how the cause of something is also its result?
For example, morality is caused by that morality causes us to survive, and survival is caused by morality.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
I can't argue that humans aren't flawed, but to claim that science is flawed because humans are flawed seems incorrect. Science is a concept it is not a thing knowledge is a thing that you obtain. I understand concepts as being nonphysical and form and yet existing which is what I describe as the metaphysical. Something metaphysical cannot be flawed because for it to have a flaw it means it must exist to be flawed.
Science is knowledge. Knowledge can be wrong, not in agreement with reality. What scientists say today is different from what they said 100 years ago, and different from what they will say in the next 100 years. That is flaw, inconsistency, where flawed being attempts to produce something flawless, ends up producing flawed science.
Although I do have a few questions, what role does religion play, what would we remove by removing religion, and is it able to be synthetically produced through alternative means.
Religion teaches about God. It strikes fear in people. Fear that they cannot get away from punishment. An individual can escape earthly punishment in many ways. However, escaping God's punishment is impossible. That punishment acts as prevention of evil along with earthly punishment.
Created:
-->
@Critical-Tim
Science has explained morality through ways of consequentialism (based on outcome), deontology (based on rules), and virtue ethics (based on intentions).
Those are methods of reasoning. They are not morality. Consequentialism, for example, is entirely different for those who place value on life, or prevention of pain, or increase of happiness. Each of these values produces entirely different conclusions about what our actions should be.
It's very much possible for there to be a thriving atheist society where morals are based on a contractarian policy where morals are based on agreement.
Religion has God. Atheist society doesnt. Therefore, any increased agreement would likely not exist. At best, you would have rule of majority, with minority being in disagreement with majority. God is what makes people more likely to agree, due to God being the judge who knows all. There are individuals who dont do evil only because of the fear of God.
However, there are certain things that are consistent among individuals such as a safe place to live and thrive in society. It is through the process of giving up one's potential desire to harm another for their own benefit because they recognize that by following an agreed upon standard that they will be protected by not harming others and forming a unity.
The problem is that such things are usually not the case. Almost every individual has harmed others at some point in life. While being given protection does reduce individual's desire to do harm, it does not eliminate the desire.
Created:
Of course, this will also motivate Russia to also use more of its own cluster bombs and even more of its destructive arsenal.
Is it smart to fight a war you cant win? No. War against Russia cannot be won. Everyone knows this.
Created:
USA ran out of regular ammo.
So either Ukraine gets defeated either Ukraine gets cluster bombs.
Now, cluster bombs are one of the most horrible violation of human rights. This is because they have wide range of explosion and using them anywhere near civilians results in civilian deaths.
Further, every cluster bomb leaves behind at least 1 unexploded small bomb. So even if no civilians were killed by the first explosion, some may still be killed if they find themselves near unexploded small bomb.
It would be more logical to give Ukraine modern warplanes.
Cluster bombs are only used in most desperate situations.
Ukraine will most certainly use cluster bombs in civilian areas. Ukraine had no problem with bombing its own civilians from year 2014 and on.
Created:
What constitutes a better society and civilization?
Depends on your moral system.
For Christians, it is wrong to decrease life. Therefore, abortions are wrong, as well as contraception probably.
For atheists, its usually different. Therefore, society that allows abortions would be considered worse by Christians. Not so much for atheists.
Would society be better if everyone was religious?
Probably, but only if most were serious about religion. If a person doesnt take religion seriously and doesnt dedicate himself to religion, he might as well be an atheist. Same difference.
Would society be better if everyone's religion was unified, and is it possible to ethically achieve this?
It is not possible to unite society. Unity is a value of virtue ethics. One of its least achievable values, if I may add. No society on Earth has such virtue. Even Christians divide among themselves.
Would society be better if everyone was Atheist?
There would be more abortions, more sinning, more adultery. Religion exists because religion prevents sin. Remove religion, you also remove the purpose it played.
What are the pros and cons to society of people being religious vs Atheist?
In the atheist society, there would be less pain. In the Christian society, there would be less sin and more population.
Will society move past religion towards a more scientific understanding of the world, and would it be better or worse for society?
While science may have answer to explaining things and reasoning, morality is something that science cannot explain. That is because morality follows a system of values. Those values must be agreed upon if morality is to be agreed upon.
Could science or another alternative fill the void that was once filled by religion?
Science is flawed, since it is produced by flawed humans. Religion played the role it needed to play for thousands of years. Abandon religion, and you might enter a point of no return where society refuses to go back to religion while at the same time not having anything else to play the role once played by religion.
Created:
Posted in:
Spirit-2 { eternally existent } , = finite set of occupied space
Okay, I am this.
Spirit-3 { eternally existent }, finite set of ultra-micro, positive geodesic ( ) of Gravity { contractive mass-attraction }
Well, my body has gravity. So I am this too.
Spirit-4 { eternally existent }, finite set of ultra-micro, negative geodesic )( of Dark Energy { expansive mass-repulsion }
Well, mass-repulsion I dont have. So I am not this.
Spirit-1 { eternally existent } Meta-space mind/intellect/concepts and ego
I have this.
I have all except Spirit-4. Maybe I have Spirit-4 too, I just dont know it yet.
Created:
Posted in:
-->
@Intelligence_06
I meant to say since most people are sane,
I wouldnt say that most people are sane. Most people are psychopaths who torture others for pleasure.
Created: