- 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
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Profiling should be used to an extent by airport officials. Profiling based on race or religion shouldn't be allowed but certain profiling should. If a known group of terrorists was known to have a very distinctive tattoo on there head then why wouldn't airport officials stop them if they saw them. We have to decide if saving time is more important than the lives of innocent people.
Torture can never truly be justified. We believe that if someone has done something so horrendous or has incredibly valuable information that it can be. But we would have to put ourselves in there shoes. Suppose a man killed 5 other, but only because those 5 had slained his family. Would it be alright to torture him? He did kill 5 but we see it as him getting his own justice. The thing with torture is it inhumane, there can never be a real reason to make someone suffer for your own gratification.
Students should be able to pick their high schools if they can get to whatever school it is on time. Obviously not to a school that is in a different state than you live in, but maybe just not the closet one. If a student lived right next door to high school A but wanted to attened high school B, 15 miles away, because they had a better learning environment and higher percentage of students who got scholarships then why shouldn't they. If a student feels that they would learn better at one high school than another there should be no problem with letting them pick their high school. The idea is that students should go to high schools in there area to prevent having to travel a long distance, which makes sense for students who cant afford to travel that distance everyday, but if a student has the transportation and is willing to go then they should.
If a president after two terms is in the positiion to run again and win than how would it annoy the "people"? The "people" are the ones who vote and decide who are president should be. The only way the president could win again is if the "people" voted for him again. Any president doing that good a job, where the "people" want him to continue running after two terms should get that chance. If a president is doing a bad job would people even consider to vote for him again?
If a president is doing well enough to become president more than twice, shouldn't they get that opportunity? George Washington believed in two terms of presidency to prevent the U.S to fall under tyranny again. Franklin D. Rooselvelt served four terms and no such thing happened. A president that the people want to serve more than two terms is obviously doing something right and why should we stop that from happening.
Illegal immigrants should be deported regardless of the situation or cause of there entering the country illegally. People should not get to bend the rules for themselves when there are hundreds and thousands out there who would give anything for a chance to live in America. The difference between those people and illegal immigrants is that those people will go through the system and enter the right and legal way. We assume that everyone should get a chance to live in America and that as long as they have a job then illegals are ok. But what if it was a group of extremist taliban muslims who enter the country illegally. Would you still feel that way? Illegal immigrants are called illegal for a reason and there is no justification of them entering the country illegally when so many others have to wait.
I don't believe developing countries should be forced to protect the environment simply because they are still developing. Developed countries have to put themselves in the developing nation shoes and ask themselves if protecting the environment will help them improve the most. A developing country is going to need help and cutting off that help to force them to protect the environment will only prolong their development. Once a country is developed then you can force them to protect the environment, but not before.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!