We Should Have An Intelectual Debate (or DUEL) On Any Topic...Read on(philosophy)

**DanteAlastor** · 14-05-2005, 19:14

Let the Intelectual Battles BEGIN
Ok.. rules are no flaming and no ad-homonim on their reasoning give atleast 2 reasons to support ur views/theory/proof/ can be religious beliefs coupled with scientific or anthropologic study to support ur views
Topics? to be discussed

Does God Exist/what is God?(my answer is yes)

Does Hell exist?(same yes)

Morality?.Do we have "Freedom?"(no) Euthenasia good or bad?(good) is pornography immoral?(yes)Do humans have free will?(no)is abortion moral? is *** marriage immoral?(yes)

What is the fate of mankind?

Is there a Possibility that life only exist on Earth? (no)or Life exist other than earth?(yes)

Why Terrorist attacks America?(religious beliefs/intervention(s) of America to the affair(s) to other countries?)

IF REPLIED I WOULD GIVE U MY DEDUCTION CONDUCTION PROOF AND REASONINGS

if no one replied Scrap this thread i dont care.

**Steve_Kow** · 14-05-2005, 19:20

Originally Posted by DanteAlastor

DEDUCTION CONDUCTION PROOF

I'm going to use that line.

**greatrambino1981** · 14-05-2005, 19:46

Proof there is a god? I want to hear this.

**Alviarin** · 14-05-2005, 19:57

www.jesusoftheweek.com

**nosoup4crr** · 14-05-2005, 19:58

Alright, I've got one that I'm interested in hearing others' opinions on. It is my contention that Democracy (Representative or Direct) cannot function in a society such as the US, where the media plays such a prominent role in the miseducation of its citizens.

Now, should you contend that the citizens aren't influenced majoritarily by the media, I would allude to 3 instances in which it is negotiable, if not apparent, that citizens know only half truths. The Nicaraguan conflict int he early 90's was largely ignored by major news medias, despite the fact that it is still, to date, one of the most poignant examples of terrorist action in the world. America was responsible for these breaches in the etiquitte of war, and as a result they were not focussed on within the states. Because of this, there are very few citizens who are even cognizant of this event. The same can be said about certain facets of the Patriot Act. Only those portions of the Act that were heavily covered in the media are recognized by the public, at large. While other portions (phone tapping, the marginalization of the burden of proof, etc.) are unknown to them. And lastly, I would allude to the idea that a majority of citizens form opinons on presidential candidates based solely on information on Television.

In the past, there was more accountability on behalf of the media for the information they give. That's not to say that if a broadcast company presents false information, they won't be punished, but rather, that these companies are more and more only presenting opinionated information. While many citizens still look to these programs for factual information with a minimal amount of interpretation, the contrary is true.

Because of this, Democracy is not feasible. Democracy is contingent on the idea that the polis is of certain ability and knowledge with which to function as an extention of the government. Intrinsic to this idea is that each individual is able to keep his self-autonomy. The self-autonomy of these individuals are being taken through coercion and misinformation. The result is a polis who is acting as an extention of those individuals who feed them information. Thus, we don't have a Democracy, but instead a Guardianship. And furthermore, this disables any ability we have to function as a Democracy.

**Alviarin** · 14-05-2005, 20:02

Also.

DanteAlastor: When you learn English, or even how to spell the word intellectual while attempting to be it, I will consider making a reply.

Lastly: My Jesus could clean the floor with your Jesus.

**SuggestiveName** · 14-05-2005, 20:29

This is way too many questions for one thread, but I will pick one. If say you can argue there is a god, how do you explain away the problem of evil. (Put simply: "It is logically impossible to believe that both evil, and a good and powerful God exist in the same reality, for such a God certainly could and would destroy evil.")

**UserMathias** · 14-05-2005, 20:34

How do you explain evil? Easy. God is a sick mother****er. And we are his play toys.

**djoat** · 14-05-2005, 20:42

Originally Posted by SuggestiveName

This is way too many questions for one thread, but I will pick one. If say you can argue there is a god, how do you explain away the problem of evil. (Put simply: "It is logically impossible to believe that both evil, and a good and powerful God exist in the same reality, for such a God certainly could and would destroy evil.")

I think most religions state that evil will be destroyed in times to come. Also, the fact that you perceive something as 'evil' and something as 'good' shows you have some internal form of standards with which to compare these. Since its largely agreed whats good and evil, whats right and wrong, whats fair or unfair, then all of us have this same set of moral standard. What would make us so homogeneous in our morals, unless we have the same creator? If our morals or set of standards evolve individually, there would be no reason to argue on whats right or wrong, since everyone would have their own set of standards. People can only argue if they're debating on the same platform.