- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
I’d have to say they should. Those individuals have done something in order to be monitored in the first place, like getting in trouble with the law; house arrest, etc. There’s no question that it should be done. Though on the other hand, people have a right to own their own privacy; their own space to themselves. This country has already set a standard; a common way of life to live and to proceed by establishing the Constitution; the Bill of Rights, and so on. The government should be able to adhere and withstand to the original rules of old; build off from them constructively in order to continue a better America. Our rights should not be relinquished for anything, but if it’s for the greater good, to help out the next person from a sexual predator or a potential murderer, etc., then hey, the door’s open.
When I think about this scenario, I think of the pros and cons of the whole idea. If you were to have a lousy father, you wouldn’t have that solid man-figure who’d be fearless when the going gets tough to look up to, and that can really eat out of a child or a teen; however old the victim is. Then on the other hand, a child without a father (particularly a male) would be lost in this world, and he wouldn’t have that significant person to talk to and to relate; a person that he’d trust to the very end when others see it differently. Though in the long run, the victim of that situation should get help if it’s really taking a toll on them physically and mentally.
In short, as for my opinion, I say that it’s better to lousy father. You would know that either he’d mistreat you, or that he’s a lazy dead-beat with no job that sleeps in all day, but if the child can use their initiative and some good common sense, then they’d see the wrong path to choose while maturing instead of following their dad’s footsteps. Seeing the negative at times can make out positive in the end, because you don’t want to have to walk the lonely road of life in shame and darkness.
If I had to come down to a decision, I would lean towards having to turn in my spouse in (barring a conversation with her), and here’s why. I don’t know what she would be thinking when had this happen. An act of that magnitude would really require someone to get professional help to ask the question: “What was going through your mind while committing murder?”
My spouse and I would have to talk about the whole thing first; really go through all the events that took place in line for this event to occur. Then after our talk, we’d have to talk with her family, as well as mine, because I would want the decision on turning her in be decided on our collectively family as a whole. During that conversation, I’m hoping to get a really thorough answer from her on how everything took place. And also another thing; you wouldn’t want to be around the type of people that would do such a thing, but there can be case where you’d have to consider their reasons and conclude if there’d be a possible offer of a second chance.
At this moment, a personal pursuit would be better for me; at this time and age for me, I definitely have to go with a goal I’ve already set for myself; going to college, particularly UT. I’m really pushing myself day in and day out, to make the best of my classes I have and to also pass them with flying colors.
Although if it wasn’t for me just being for me, which sounds selfish on my part, I’m all up for advancing the common good. The trend setters for this day and age, not particularly style-wise, but those who want the young to succeed; example: President Barack Obama, the ones who wants everybody to go out and help the community in any way possible, any way you can. That also goes hand in hand with helping out the other when they’re in dire need. I’m really that at heart, and always will be, but presently, I have to go with my personal pursuit.
Yes, I think that we should still study William Shakespeare’s work. In order to find another way to write literature in English class, it should be in the curriculum for the high school senior, or for high school, in general.
I mean, sure, the way Shakespeare would have the old-english way of grammar is pretty boring to most students. It is a pain to read, but I still have to get through it, as well as everyone else. We as students still should get to know the real roots of English literature; in Shakespeare; and how it has changed through time.
I support this statement by Sartre. Back in the old days, America's founding fathers helped us through what we needed under British rule. They stood up for what they believed in, knowing that this freedom that we know today would be useful for the future. It’s now what we use whenever we have something to say, whenever we want to express our feelings and our displeasures to the world around us. We’re very fortunate for this privilege we have today and so we shouldn’t abuse freedom in any way.
I'm really favoring Barack Obama, and it's not just because he's an African-American, like some others would favor him by. Which is all good, don't get me wrong, but I also side the view points he proposes, most notably, education.
Whenever I watched the Presidential Debates between Sen. Obama and Sen. McCain, it really sounds like Obama actually stresses on the faults on the education time period we young Americans are going through. College is a lot of money, people, we'd have to have someone who wants to get the problem of paying off school loans, etc. so that it would be a whole lot easier on families. Other countries around the world are well advanced and well educated, and farther down the road of the main subjects of Math and Science.
Mr. Obama wants to change that situation.
He wants this country to change like no one else has done before.
He wants us to change for the good, the positive, and the righteousness of all Americans and their needs, particularly the middle class. McCain, in my eyes doesn't seem to really hit it home on the subject of education, as well as some other issues that are puzzling us all.
This is why I'm supporting Mr. Barack Obama to becoming the next President of the United States of America.
For me, I think being well respected would take me or anyone else farther than to best if I were to be wealthy. In the long run, I can feel great with myself being respected, because it makes others know where I stand on caring about someone feels than just probably being a stuck up snobby person with a lot of money. Though that is a stereotype, there are a select few that do that kind of thing. All that money can be here one day, and gone tomorrow, while being respected; if you keep up the way you act towards anybody you'd meet, then that would be cemented with you for eternity.
I think it's better to be a little bit of both. For me, personally, I'd rather be loved a lot more than being feared. Like Coldplay's song, "Viva la Vida", Chris Martin (lead singer) says, "...Feel the fear in my enemy's eyes..." I like that lyric, because of it's meaning. In the heat of the moment, if you're feared by someone, you probably are going to "feel the fear", the intimidation, etc.
I'm just not the type of person that would love to be feared upon. I wouldn't want to harm anyone in anyway, so why would I want to be a sight of fright?
It's needed b/c you don't know when someone's up to at any given time; whether it be during passing period and students are all around, or when class has started and a person's in the hall. Probably they could be trying to pull a prank and do some elementary-type thing a do the old fashioned "fire drill" trick or God knows what. Although, some other students might feel insecure about the whole thing; it's normal, but it's just for safety, and I'm fine with that.