I am calling out the number 1 on the leaderboard Alec

Topic's author

#1

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 01:35PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 01:35PM

Debate me on a topic.

Have a few suggestions below so that I can pick one that you agree with.

There is also a way in which I want you to do debates. Remove the forfeits and put in place the first Round is for opening arguments. The other Rounds are for rebuttals which means we both have one extra Round for opening arguments but the same amount of Rounds for rebuttals.

Topic's author

#2

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 01:36PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 01:36PM

-->

@Alec

Hey.

#3

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.03.2019 01:47PM

5

7

11

05.03.2019 01:47PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

I would enjoy debating you, but it would be too time consuming. I have an AP Chem test coming up and I have to study for it. I could debate you after May 9th. I don't think I'll be #1 by then. Ramshutu and oromagi are catching up to me fast.

What's your stance on guns? Do you want them all banned or just some of them?

Topic's author

#4

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 01:52PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 01:52PM

-->

@Alec

What's your stance on guns? Do you want them all banned or just some of them?

I am for more gun laws. Not bad laws good ones.

1)What is your political position?
2)Are you a libertarian?
3)Do you want to talk about Marx?
4)Is Trump a bad president?

I don't really care too much about guns but the ones I brought seem rather interesting.

Topic's author

#5

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 01:53PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 01:53PM

-->

@Alec

You are for abortion right?

#6

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.03.2019 02:02PM

5

7

11

05.03.2019 02:02PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

1) I used to be a conservative, but I'm a libertarian now.

2) For the most part, yes.

3) I don't like Karl Marx but I don't know too much about him.

4) Trump is not my favorite president. Trump is a bad president since he has done some things that I don't agree with, like separating families and imposing tariffs. However, his tax code was a little good. He's good at combating the left which has gone so far left that they had to choose between someone who was enshrined in identity politics(Hillary) and a socialist(Bernie) who supports a maximum wage. Now, they have AOC who is more left then Sanders since she has spoken out against capitalism.

5)I used to be pro life, but now I'm pro choice because if you kill the fetus, they go to heaven. If you let them live, they will probably go to hell according to the bible.

Topic's author

#7

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 02:07PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 02:07PM

-->

@Alec

3) I don't like Karl Marx but I don't know too much about him.

Read up on him and debate him about me if you want.

they have AOC who is more left then Sanders since she has spoken out against capitalism.

How about a debate where you are pro-capitalism and my position is to find the failures of capitalism?

5)I used to be pro life, but now I'm pro choice because if you kill the fetus, they go to heaven. If you let them live, they will probably go to hell according to the bible.

Troll comment. Await an actual one.

There is also a way in which I want you to do debates. Remove the forfeits and put in place the first Round is for opening arguments. The other Rounds are for rebuttals which means we both have one extra Round for opening arguments but the same amount of Rounds for rebuttals.

I said that. What is your response to it?

#8

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.03.2019 02:25PM

5

7

11

05.03.2019 02:25PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

How about a debate where you are pro-capitalism and my position is to find the failures of capitalism?

A debate would be where I'm pro capitalism and you anti-capitalism, ot where I say that I support capitalism and you then try to modify it to be more left wing.

5)I used to be pro life, but now I'm pro choice because if you kill the fetus, they go to heaven. If you let them live, they will probably go to hell according to the bible.
Troll comment. Await an actual one.

How is this a troll comment?

There is also a way in which I want you to do debates. Remove the forfeits and put in place the first Round is for opening arguments. The other Rounds are for rebuttals which means we both have one extra Round for opening arguments but the same amount of Rounds for rebuttals.
I said that. What is your response to it?

I don't care how people argue for the most part. I usually have a few rules but I wouldn't have it as structured as this.

Topic's author

#9

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 02:29PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 02:29PM

-->

@Alec

A debate would be where I'm pro capitalism and you anti-capitalism, ot where I say that I support capitalism and you then try to modify it to be more left wing.

No not anti-capitalist more so a critique with a few suggestions to improve capitalism by making it less free market. Not anti-capitalism because there will still be capitalism. It can be modified to be more left wing but right would agree as well but not the wealthy portion of it similar to the wealth left wing portion of it.

How is this a troll comment?

So you are anti-life and believe in the Bible?

I don't care how people argue for the most part. I usually have a few rules but I wouldn't have it as structured as this.

My simple rule would mean we would have one more Round to argue but the same amount for rebuttals.

#10

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.03.2019 02:31PM

5

7

11

05.03.2019 02:31PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

So you are anti-life and believe in the Bible?

It's always the left labeling their political opponents. It does get annoying. I support abortion rights because a dead baby goes to heaven.

Topic's author

#11

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 02:34PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 02:34PM

-->

@Alec

It's always the left labeling their political opponents.

Are you against labels? Why are you using them if you are? Isn't that hypocritical?

It does get annoying.

Yes it is annoying when we have a hypocrite.

I support abortion rights because a dead baby goes to heaven.

So you are anti-life in respect to life that has not yet been born?

And pro-life when it comes to existing life?

#12

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.03.2019 02:39PM

5

7

11

05.03.2019 02:39PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

Are you against labels? Why are you using them if you are? Isn't that hypocritical?

I'm against derogatory slurs like "anti-life". When I was pro life, I got a lot of smears calling me sexist, anti-choice, misogynistic, etc. It's not like I use these against you.

So you are anti-life in respect to life that has not yet been born?
And pro-life when it comes to existing life?

I basically don't want the kid born, so you could say I'm anti life for the reason that I stated.

When it comes to post born humans, I tend to lean libertarian, although I do have exceptions.

Topic's author

#13

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 02:43PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 02:43PM

-->

@Alec

I'm against derogatory slurs like "anti-life".

It is not derogatory. It is the correct label for what you are in respect to the unborn. Are you?

When I was pro life, I got a lot of smears calling me sexist, anti-choice, misogynistic, etc. It's not like I use these against you.

If you discriminate against women then those words would be correct.

I basically don't want the kid born, so you could say I'm anti life for the reason that I stated.

So why are you claiming that it is a derogatory word when it is what you are? It is like saying we shouldn't call a serial killer a serial killer because it si a derogatory word. Do you take that stance?

When it comes to post born humans, I tend to lean libertarian, although I do have exceptions.

So you are for the death penalty or war?

#14

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.03.2019 02:50PM

5

7

11

05.03.2019 02:50PM

-->

@TheRealNihilist

It is not derogatory. It is the correct label for what you are in respect to the unborn. Are you?

I'm anti-life on this. Just like you are anti-choice.

Many left wingers would claim that restricting abortion is sexist. I know why you want to prohibit/restrict abortion; to save an innocent human life.

To address your serial killer argument, there is something objectively wrong with being a serial killer. There is nothing objectively wrong with being pro life or pro choice.

I support the death penalty. It's a minor issue; very few murderers are executed compared to other issues. War in some situations is too expensive. It defends freedom, but I want the EU to lead the war effort instead of the US. It could help unify Europe.

Topic's author

#15

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.03.2019 02:55PM

4

9

11

05.03.2019 02:55PM

-->

@Alec

I'm anti-life on this. Just like you are anti-choice.

The baby did not have a choice to be brought into this world and since you don't know my position you can't claim what my position is. Do ask before assuming.

Many left wingers would claim that restricting abortion is sexist. I know why you want to prohibit/restrict abortion; to save an innocent human life.

If you are discriminating against women since they can only have abortion then you are a sexist. What part of that is wrong?

To address your serial killer argument, there is something objectively wrong with being a serial killer.

Tell me how it is objectively wrong to be a serial killer Mr objective morality?

There is nothing objectively wrong with being pro life or pro choice.

You are still making the claim one is wrong but how is it not objective?

I support the death penalty. It's a minor issue; very few murderers are executed compared to other issues. War in some situations is too expensive. It defends freedom, but I want the EU to lead the war effort instead of the US. It could help unify Europe.

For death penalty. Haven't really said if you are pro or against war and made some claim about Europe as if it could be true.

#16

K_Michael

Debates: 38

Posts: 749

4

5

10

K_Michael

05.03.2019 06:21PM

4

5

10

05.03.2019 06:21PM

-->

@Alec

I used to be pro life, but now I'm pro choice because if you kill the fetus, they go to heaven. If you let them live, they will probably go to hell according to the bible.

But the doctor and mother will go to hell.

#17

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.03.2019 06:35PM

5

7

11

05.03.2019 06:35PM

-->

@K_Michael

They probably would have gone to hell anyways. At least abortion saves the fetus from hell.

#18

K_Michael

Debates: 38

Posts: 749

4

5

10

K_Michael

05.03.2019 06:40PM

4

5

10

05.03.2019 06:40PM

I don't think that's supportable from a utilitarian standpoint. Damning two people for sure in order to save one for sure when there is potential for three saved souls. It's similar to the trolley problem, except one of the options has the potential to save everyone.

#19

Snoopy

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,320

2

4

Snoopy

05.03.2019 06:46PM

2

4

05.03.2019 06:46PM

Many left wingers would claim that restricting abortion is sexist. I know why you want to prohibit/restrict abortion; to save an innocent human life.
If you are discriminating against women since they can only have abortion then you are a sexist. What part of that is wrong?

Assuming the intent is to discriminate against women would be wrong when it comes to Pro-Life. It just happens that women bear children.

#20

Snoopy

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,320

2

4

Snoopy

05.03.2019 06:52PM

2

4

05.03.2019 06:52PM

-->

@K_Michael

I don't think that's supportable from a utilitarian standpoint. Damning two people for sure in order to save one for sure when there is potential for three saved souls. It's similar to the trolley problem, except one of the options has the potential to save everyone.

Aren't you a Christian?

#21

K_Michael

Debates: 38

Posts: 749

4

5

10

K_Michael

05.03.2019 07:11PM

4

5

10

05.03.2019 07:11PM

-->

@Snoopy

Sure, but logically that doesn't make sense. Logic and Christianity aren't mutually exclusive.

I am a member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter-day Saints (Mormon), so I believe in baptisms for the dead. You can be saved after you die.

But just because those people are likely to be saved whether or not they abort a baby, or even likely to be damned whether or not they abort a baby as Alec says, doesn't mean I should allow or endorse that action, because it is a sin.

God says that I am a watchman on a tower who must warn my fellow man, or I will be held accountable for their actions. On that note, I challenge you to read the Book of Mormon.

#22

Snoopy

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,320

2

4

Snoopy

05.03.2019 07:30PM

2

4

05.03.2019 07:30PM

-->

@K_Michael

Certainly, the moral imperative lies within the jurisdiction of the church to correct such a misguided prescription. However, the legal jurisdiction of government, or rather lack thereof, neither allows nor endorses an action in this case.

#23

K_Michael

Debates: 38

Posts: 749

4

5

10

K_Michael

05.03.2019 07:31PM

4

5

10

05.03.2019 07:31PM

-->

@Snoopy

Explain that in simple terms for me.

#24

Snoopy

Debates: 1

Posts: 1,320

2

4

Snoopy

05.03.2019 07:56PM

2

4

05.03.2019 07:56PM

-->

@K_Michael

The context arises from a prospective relationship between the people and the state. I'm saying that Alec has an approach to prescription from the state which you argue to be disordered, and that is one thing. Additionally though, you said you should not allow or endorse the action of abortion. So, I found it fitting to add that if the government does not intervene on an issue, that does not constitute an endorsement of any action, nor does it allow it.

#25

K_Michael

Debates: 38

Posts: 749

4

5

10

K_Michael

05.04.2019 12:18AM

4

5

10

05.04.2019 12:18AM

If you don't intervene, but you have the power, technically you are allowing it to happen.

#26

oromagi

Debates: 117

Posts: 8,696

8

10

11

oromagi

05.04.2019 05:38AM

8

10

11

05.04.2019 05:38AM

-->

@Ramshutu

@Alec

I would enjoy debating you, but it would be too time consuming. I have an AP Chem test coming up and I have to study for it. I could debate you after May 9th. I don't think I'll be #1 by then. Ramshutu and oromagi are catching up to me fast.

If there's a horse named VoteKing in tomorrow's Kentucky Derby, bet everything u got, cuz Ramshutu's pulling ahead.

Good luck in chemistry, May the 4th b w/ u.

#27

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.04.2019 12:20PM

5

7

11

05.04.2019 12:20PM

-->

@oromagi

Thanks for the good luck. On the practice exam, I got a 2, so I doubt I'll do well on the test. I can still try.

#28

Ramshutu

Debates: 43

Posts: 2,768

6

9

10

Ramshutu

05.04.2019 05:59PM

6

9

10

05.04.2019 05:59PM

-->

@Alec

I'd be happy to debate you on Gun Control - provides I don’t have to take the ultimate extreme position on it (ie: pro gun control, not 100% anti-all-guns)

Topic's author

#29

TheRealNihilist

Debates: 44

Posts: 4,920

4

9

11

TheRealNihilist

05.04.2019 06:03PM

4

9

11

05.04.2019 06:03PM

-->

@Ramshutu

https://www.debateart.com/debates/758

Here is a look at his sources. I would debate him on that but I would have to put effort into finding sources that provide my point. If you already have sources you should be fine because the points he brought up well lets just say they are shite. See his sources used if you don't think they are shite.

#30

Alec

Debates: 42

Posts: 2,472

5

7

11

Alec

05.04.2019 06:34PM

5

7

11

05.04.2019 06:34PM

-->

@Ramshutu

If you were to debate me on Gun control starting May 10, what would your position be? Would you want all AK 15s/AK47s banned? Would you support someone with autism getting a gun? Would you support universal background check(UBC) requirements for guns? I can answer these questions personally:

Question 1(AK 15s/AK 47s): No. They provide protection against multiple criminals and a tyrannical government.

Question 2(Autism): No. I have autism. I want a gun. I don't want to do murder with it. I want protection(https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/1741) and maybe some hunting with it.

Question 3 (UBC): I don't know too much about background checks, which is why I made a forum about it. If a background check is what I think it is, then no. I don't want the government knowing if I or anyone else has a gun. Otherwise, they could conduct tyranny against the people who don't own guns. An example that would appeal to liberals is the deporting of illegal immigrants and separating children at the border. I am willing to admit that breaking up families is tyranny. Would it happen if illegals had guns without the gov knowing to protect themselves?