see also :
Penpals for kids
Forum about Debates - Society
- Optional filter -
see also :
Blogs for kids
& teachers
Display option :
Subject :
Text search :
#REF :

Would you like to start a new debate?
Click here and insert your own message!

18144 -
modify delete 18152 - Reply from Nicolas209 , 53 yrs (France) - 2018-04-06

Well, I don't like to tell about my own opinions. But this is what I think personally:

- Religion can bring both the worst and the best; it just dépends on people's mind.

- If I was a politic leader, I would stop wars and looting of poor countries. We should help poor countries to exploit themselves their own wealth (mineral resources, human ressources, renewable energy...), instead of just sending small amounts of money. They don't need begging ; just peace, respect and smart communication. Then, they will be able to grow, and poor people will be able to survive without having to leave their country.

18144 -
modify delete 18146 - Reply from Abram110 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-04

Bonjour Nicolas!

Always! You're absolutely right; we're not here to "fight" each other, we're here to learn and expand our horizons. Proper debate should never be confused with fighting.

By the way, Nicolas, while you're here I'd like to see some of your own opinions. I'm sure you can bring something good to the table!

Thank you!

18144 -
modify delete 18145 - Reply from Nicolas17 , 53 yrs (France) - 2018-04-04

Hello Abram,

I understand what you mean. Well, you can debate about gun prohibition if you like, provided you don't tell about religion issues, please, because it will bring division or hurt some people.

Please, just think about the aim of this website : allow people to know each other better ; not fight each other. Let's try to stay positive.


modify delete 18139 - from Abram15 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-04
Society - "Is Islam Dangerous?"

Greetings debaters!

I am beginning a new thread to discuss Islam because it is a new subject that shouldn't be discussed on the already packed thread "Guns Prohibition." Guns prohibition should be discussed on that thread, not Islam. But I encourage everyone to have a look at that thread, for that is where the debate on Islam began, and you can contribute to the buns prohibition debate.

I am not reposting all of the relevant excerpts from the Quran because that would take two more messages due to the 8000 character per message limit, and those excerpts are easily accessible on the "guns prohibition" thread. Please read those excerpts before you contribute to the debate; educate yourself.

Thank you!

18139 -
modify delete 18183 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-05-28

It's normal to keep an open eye on Muslims because some of them have a wrong interpretation of the holly book. You cannot see a member of other religion becoming a terrorist. It's extremelly difficult to make a distinction between real Muslims and the ones who want to spread the djihad. So, FOR OUR SECURITY let's close our borders.

18139 -
modify delete 18182 - Reply from Anonymous 166 (United States) - 2018-05-28

My take on Islam?

I do not believe that Muslims are at all dangerous! I have met a few Muslims on here, and they are all great people. I have learned from a Muslim friend that it is against Islam to hurt people!

I also do not believe in a Muslim ban... it was a restriction looking for terrorists and trying to weed them out from the good people. If a Muslim wanted to come from... let me just say UK (for example, list any country not listed!) they would be perfectly allowed. The government doesn't just say no because they are a Muslim!!! If a woman from Canada wanted to move to the U.S., they wouldn't look at her and see a hijab and say that she couldn't come in. Same with a man wearing a taqiyah! And that is not to say that all Muslims wear those garments.

The government was just trying to keep our people safe. They know that not everybody is a terrorist! This was also not permanent. Also, may I mention, that if a Christian, Hindu, Buddhist, or anyone of any other religion besides Islam from those countries wanted to come in during the ban, they would be denied in the same way that a Muslim would! Also, Venezuela was listed as having a travel ban as well, and they are NOT a Muslim country!!!

So, that is my take on the supposed "Muslim ban" that was never put in place.


18139 -
modify delete 18164 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-04-19


I believe proper, respectful debate, is an insighful, pleassurable form of education and communication.

As long as there are issues of opinion, I am sure there will always be individuals with contradicting beliefs. We must be mindful of others fancy, but never avoid disscussing or expressing our own ideas, moderately and respectively.

18139 -
modify delete 18162 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-04-18

I agree with Lea. I add that every belief is bound to be reality for the believer as long as it is not a message of hatred and intolerance.

18139 -
modify delete 18161 - Reply from Eva212 , 17 yrs (Germany) - 2018-04-18

I think it is woth to dicuss religion in general, because just as I started talking about christianity I realised so many things. I learned to recognize metaphors, symbols, similies and how to interpret them. With thinking about religion I became tolerant and I learned that when to people are reading the same text, they could think a thousands of different thoughts and no one is wrong and no one completely right. I have not read the old discussion,but I think it is worth to talk about religion.

18139 -
modify delete 18143 - Reply from Abram110 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-04

Bonjour, Nicolas!

I understand that some people find it difficult to maintain a calm demeanor while debating sensitive issues, and I implore everyone to do so. If this debate does not suit you, although I encourage you to watch from the sidelines, I don't mind at all if you abandon this thread.

I have been discussing various other issues on the preceding threads; please feel free and encouraged to contribute!

Thank you for your concern!

18139 -
modify delete 18142 - Reply from Nicolas17 , 53 yrs (France) - 2018-04-04

Abram, il y a déjà eu pas mal de débat sur ce sujet ici, et on a fini par les supprimer car bien souvent, ça tournait mal. Si vous pouviez parler d'autre chose, ça m'arrangerait. Merci !

modify delete 18128 - from Lamine104 (algeria) - 2018-03-31
Society - "War criminal"

Where is Nicolas Sarkozy's natural place?
Is he considered a war criminal ?
Should he be tried on charges of killing Libyans?
Or He deserves better treatment?

18128 -
modify delete 18141 - Reply from Nicolas17 (France) - 2018-04-04

C'est fait, j'ai bien reçu ton message et j'ai répondu. Au passage, je te remercie pour ta vigilance.

18128 -
modify delete 18137 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-04-04

Nicolas, à quelle adresse courriel puis-je vous contacter? J'ai quelqu'un à vous rapporter.

18128 -
modify delete 18130 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-31

Nicolas Sarkozy did war to kill colonel Kadhafi because he did slaughters to his people. He was considered as a dictator. But I think it was a mistake because Kadhafi had ordered France 10 nuclear power plants, a right on uranium mines and quite 100 planes. Sarkozy had not fought of France.

modify delete 18118 - from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-23
Society - "Srikes"

Strikes paralyse France. What is your opinion ? Do you think the radz unions must go on like this or not ? I think they are right. The government gives all the money to the ricH.
It takes on the poor and the middle classes.

18118 -
modify delete 18163 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-04-18

Bonjour dear Luojun, it's a strong possibility. but I think a good Governement, everywhere in the world, should be a melting of social rights and freedom. Communism for jobs IN ADMIISTRATION, capitalism for jobs in private field AND decent wages FOR ALL.

18118 -
modify delete 18159 - Reply from luojun127 (China) - 2018-04-13

I think now it's a Revisionist government

18118 -
modify delete 18156 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-04-08

I thought that chinese governement was communist, left winged. I don't understand why it has decided to do that. Maybe it has started to become capitalist. Or only members of nomenclatura won't be concerned. If so, it seems like Soviet Union times.

18118 -
modify delete 18149 - Reply from luojun127 , 15 yrs (China) - 2018-04-05

Bonjour, dear Régine.
Someone may says the labors are wayward and ignore their proper occupations. But I believe they are right. French labors fought for their rights since 1831 in Lyon. Now the working class is weak, so they have no choice but to fight for their rights through strikes.
A few days ago, thousands of sanitationmen struck in Shanghai because their wages are deducted for no reason. It lasted for few days, then it was suppressed. I believe both French and Chinese government should cares for the labors more.

18118 -
modify delete 18136 - Reply from Lillian209 , 13 yrs (USA) - 2018-04-03

Hey, looks like we all agree. :)

18118 -
modify delete 18135 - Reply from Abram15 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-03

Bonjour Raphael!

Yes, Here is a point about which we are in agreement: governments are corrupt; they have been , while the people have been brainwashed and distracted, hijacked by certain influential people to serve the interests of the "Cabal," if you will, and not those of the people. There is hope, however, for the US. It's just law granting ample individual freedom, although largely ignored today, still exists, the Constitution, and could be enforced if enough people could be educated properly.

Thanks for your opinion!

18118 -
modify delete 18124 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-03-26

Presque tous les gouvernements occidentaux sont totalement asservis aux intérêts des riches et ne se préoccupent pas du tout du sort des pauvres et de la classe moyenne.

18118 -
modify delete 18120 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-24

My parents and I belongs to the middle classes. At the limit of poverty. Our wages won't increase. And we pay many taxes.

modify delete 18117 - from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-23
Society - "Artifitial intelligence"

I think computers couldhave a soul, as they work like a brain. Electronics are like neurons. And what about a next life in a machine ?

18117 -
modify delete 18232 - Reply from Head Salmon131 (Salmonistan) - 2018-10-28

We Salmons upload ourselves on Google Drive when we die and we still preserve our souls. HUMANS ARE INFERIOR

18117 -
modify delete 18160 - Reply from Camille163 , 15 yrs (France) - 2018-04-13

Brain is a deep network with links between the neurons but I think one day we'll be able to do the same not necessarily on computers. We have to try to find how is it connect.

18117 -
modify delete 18131 - Reply from Abram15 , 16 yrs (usa) - 2018-04-03


I think this question should be posted on the philosophy form, not the politics forum, but I'll have a go at it anyway.

I'll start out by saying that I don't know if machines could ever become human. But I will dispute your premise that "electronics" are like neurons; that's absurd. Electrical impulses are involved in brain function and are very important, but that's where the similarities end.

If humans have a soul, I think that it must have been made by God. Humans make machines, but they cannot make souls. So I do not think that humans can make machines with souls.

Thanks for your question!

18117 -
modify delete 18123 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-03-26

C'est du gros n'importe quoi.

modify delete 18088 - from Régine113 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-02-22
Society - "Wild life"

In France wolves come down near hamlets and plains to kill sheeps.
Do you think they must be shot down ?
Bears do the same. Someone let in the forest honey with pieces of glass !!!
What do you think of all of that ?

18088 -
modify delete 18110 - Reply from Lillian209 , 13 yrs (USA) - 2018-03-16

It's a small mistake. You can't exactly say someone has terrible English because they messed up on a plural word.

18088 -
modify delete 18108 - Reply from Nicolas152 (France) - 2018-03-16

Moi j'aime bien les chips :-)
so I like "sheeps" too

18088 -
modify delete 18104 - Reply from scholar229 (usa) - 2018-03-16

Regine, lol )) Your English is horrible. Sheep, not "sheeps".
"One sheep. Two sheep, three sheep."

18088 -
modify delete 18093 - Reply from Abram110 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-03-04

Bonjour Regine!

I think that farmers are justified in taking measures to protect their animals, such as fences, guard dogs, etc. But I do not think that anyone is justified in trying to exterminate these predators for no good reason. They are all wonderful animals and occupy an essential ecological role; if they were removed, the food chain wood be broken and the environment would turn to utter chaos and self destruction; herbivores would multiply unhindered and strip the world of vegetation and then die out themselves when they consumed it all. Obviously, if just a one or two predators were gone this wouldn't happen every time, but the consequences would still be negative and far reaching. It is very easy to avoid animal attacks in most cases; most animal attacks occur when a human is very stupid, such as cornering the animal or stepping between it and its babies.

Thanks for your question!

18088 -
modify delete 18092 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-04

There are associations to protect these predators. I live near a parc for them. If they were well feed there they wouldn't come to attack sheeps. One day, early in the morning a neighbour saw one of them. But fortunatelly he has not been attacked. Do you think there is a solution ?

modify delete 18053 - from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-02-18
Society - "Animals experimentation"

What do you think about animals experimentation ? I am completely against and I think tscientists and laws should replace animals by criminals and computers. Because animals are innoccent. I never give for research. The little martyrs will have their vengeance for sure.

18053 -
modify delete 18115 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (usa) - 2018-03-18

Greetings Korla!

I do believe that you are correct; for animals, the desires are stronger and the free will is less. But, we must remember that humans are almost no different from other animals in the respect of our instincts, desires, endocrinological influences, physiological influences, and social influences, to name a few. Here,, is an EXCELLENT lecture series that will enlighten you on this topic, behavioral biology. As the professor points out, rulings have been made in the court of law to partially exonerate murderers, because they were under one or more of the above influences and couldn't, to a large extent, control their actions. Even so, I would agree with you that one still retains culpability for their actions, to varying extents, even if they weren't in a stable state of mind.

Thanks for your input!

18053 -
modify delete 18095 - Reply from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-03-07

Hello Abram, hello Koria ! Animals are sweet, innocent,fellow and wonderfull. We couln't live without them. They bring us love and protection. They light our life. They are SENSITIVE AND CAN SUFFER; THEY DO NOT MERIT PAIN.

18053 -
modify delete 18094 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-03-06

Hello Abram,
I notice simliar scenarios with my two pet dogs, only not with chickens. I can agree with you only partially. I don't think they choose between right or wrong, but to do, or not to do. Domesticated pets have instinctive urges telling them to do something that has been engrained into their DNA, and a master who disproves of the action. Their strongest urge wins. Mankind can must decided right from wrong and to do or not to do and just like the dogs must make a decision. For us though, no matter how loud our desire or conscience is for something or to do something, we can always choose whether or not to obey it.
Do you think there is a there a difference between the two?

18053 -
modify delete 18091 - Reply from Abram110 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-03-03

Hello Korla!

I'm not sure I agree with you; I have two dogs as pets and one of them seem to be very intelligent, for a dog. If I observe him carefully, I notice that he makes a decision to follow a command or submit to his own desire, such as his desire to chase down and consume our chickens. In a way, this behavior could be construed as a choice between right, following the command of the master, and wrong, submitting to a personal desire.

What do you think?

Thanks for your input!

18053 -
modify delete 18090 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-03-02

In a way, animals are innocent. But they cannot make decisions between right and wrong.

18053 -
modify delete 18087 - Reply from Abram110 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-21

Hello Raphael!

I would like to append to my earlier message that ethics are, and should be, part of a "Sane debate" on this issue.

Thank you!

18053 -
modify delete 18082 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-20

Hello Raphael!

Ethics are very important. Are you averse to discussing ethics? Are you trying to avoid the difficult questions that must be answered before you assume that sacrifices other animals is a good thing?

Thank you for your input!

18053 -
modify delete 18078 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-20

That's not a sane debate ; it's more of an ethical question.

18053 -
modify delete 18073 - Reply from Régine113 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-02-20

Hello Abram ! Well said !

18053 -
modify delete 18072 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-20

Hello Raphael!

Humans are animals, homo sapiens. How do you know that the life of a human animal is worth more than any other kind of animal, and thus worth the sacrifices of the lives of other animals?

Thank you for your input!

18053 -
modify delete 18067 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-20

Medical tests on animals are essential to save human lives.

18053 -
modify delete 18054 - Reply from lillian101 , 13 yrs (usa) - 2018-02-18

No one, not even criminals, should be used as a experiment.

modify delete 18052 - from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-15
Society - "Books"


Does anyone know why most books are more expensive in Canada than in America? Is it just because most books that we see are American? Do you know, Raphael?

Thank you!

18052 -
modify delete 18077 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-20

Indeed, Korla was absolutely right.

18052 -
modify delete 18068 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-20

Hello Raphael!

Yes, thank you for your input; that is what Korla revealed.

18052 -
modify delete 18066 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-20

Actually, it's because of the gap between the USD's exchange rate and the CAD's one.

18052 -
modify delete 18058 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-18


I think that you are right Fernando. Thank you for commenting.

I like your theory Korla!

18052 -
modify delete 18056 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA ) - 2018-02-18

It may very well be because of the difference in exchange rates. 1 USD is equivalent to 1.25 CAD.

18052 -
modify delete 18055 - Reply from Fernando81 (United States) - 2018-02-18

Depends on the book because some books in the United States are more expensive than in Canada.It depends on the book because depends on your choices.

modify delete 18043 - from Régine203 , 51 yrs (France) - 2018-02-12
Society - "Free exchange"

I am for a society where people are paid with exchange of work and things. In French it is called "Troc". In France an association does this but the law has prohibited exchanges of services because it avoided taxes. It's a shame. Whatis your opinion ?

18043 -
modify delete 18106 - Reply from Lillian209 , 13 yrs (USA) - 2018-03-16


18043 -
modify delete 18099 - Reply from Raphaël169 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-03-09

It's disencouraged by the government for it doesn't provide any taxes.

18043 -
modify delete 18081 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-20

Hello Raphael!

Why do you think that barter is suppressed? By whom?

Thank you for your input.

18043 -
modify delete 18076 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-20

That isn't forbidden neither in Canada, but that's widely disencouraged.

18043 -
modify delete 18071 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-20

Not prohibited in the US, anyway...

18043 -
modify delete 18070 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-20

Hello Raphael!

And barter is not prohibited, nor should it be; it has merely fallen out of fashion. It is involved with the inalienable freedom of contract.

Thank you for your input!

18043 -
modify delete 18065 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-20

À petite échelle, le troc devrait être permis et même encouragé.

18043 -
modify delete 18051 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-12

Hi Korla!

Thank you for your clarification!

18043 -
modify delete 18050 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-12

For example, if one has no currency they can exchange their skills or talent for food, money or something else in exchange.

18043 -
modify delete 18048 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-12

Hi Korla!

I don't understand you why you say that barter creates something out nothing; that is not true. Please explain more clearly what you meant.

Thank you!

18043 -
modify delete 18046 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-12

I am all for barter and trade. It helps some people create something out of nothing when cash is not an option.

18043 -
modify delete 18045 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-12

Bonjour Regine! In the USA it's called barter. Currency is quite new relative to barter. And our paper currency is in its infancy. But it is already doing incredible damage; it is directly linked to the harmful economic boom-bust cycles. It is dangerous and unstable because it is actually has no intrinsic value: it is just a piece of paper. Its value is completely dependent on the confidence of people in it. To make things worse, the governments print vast quantities of the stuff which increases the supply currency while the supply of goods remains the same. This leads to inflation. whenever the government sees it to be politically expedient, they can make it seem like the economy is doing well or they can rip the rug out from underneath and cause chaos as in the Great Depression. The government only recently acquired the power to this by abolishing the gold standard and selling itself to the Federal reserve. The government, let alone the federal reserve, a private entity,, has no power to print currency; the Constitution states that Congress shall have the power to "coin" money. This means that if someone brings them precious metal, they can mint coins out of them and stamp them. But today noone cares about this blatant and destructive violation of the Constitution. Another related violation is in the form of legal tender laws; the government has passed laws that force everyone to accept worthless paper in exchange for their goods and services. The government doesn't want people to be independent. To answer your original question, I think barter is a good thing that should be revived. We chose instead to sacrifice our freedom for mere convenience. To learn more, read The Creature from Jekyll Island, by G. Edward Griffin. Here is the link to a free PDF of the book:

modify delete 17940 - from Asta72 (Denmark) - 2018-01-08
Society - "journalism and state"

I want to know about how journalismen and news is in your countries? I am really interested in hearing your opinion, after every thing about fake news. But also because of the shift towards an increasingly digital news outlet.

In Denmark we pay what is called "licent" through taxes. the money go to our national public service and entertainment station called "DR" (Denmarks radio). Even though some Danish politicians are trying to remove it or change it, I really like it. Because research shows that countries with strong public service have better news variety. Also non biased and excessable news is one of the fundamental pillars of democracy. Without journalismen a citizen cannot make an educated decision about issues in our society. therefor I think that free and non biased journalism should be a part of the tripartion of power and be treated like the judicial system. by that I mean that it should be provided by the state, because of democratic importance, but should function independently.

What do you think? should news be founded by the state? and how are things done where you live?

17940 -
modify delete 18098 - Reply from Raphaël169 , 13 yrs (Canada) - 2018-03-09

C'était bas ça par contre.

17940 -
modify delete 18089 - Reply from lillian209 , 13 yrs (usa) - 2018-02-22

Like you sometimes Raphael?

17940 -
modify delete 18064 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-20

Indeed, there will unfortunately always be people publicly saying random things without being informed about the issue they talk about.

17940 -
modify delete 18049 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-12

Hi Korla!

Yes, I agree completely; one must always analyze their sources of information.

17940 -
modify delete 18047 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-12

Freedom of expression through speech or the press, should never be jeopardized. I was meaning to imply that one must watch for what they listen to, hear or read because it may not be a very reliable source of information. Thank You.

17940 -
modify delete 18042 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-11

Hello korla!

Thank you so much for posting!

I agree with your analysis of internet and TV news sources. But I wouldn't move in the direction of censoring those who post uneducated opinions. Freedom of speech is very important. I don't think that is what you were suggesting, though.

Good points, Korla! But don't forget to check out the third thread from to to bottom where a similar debate is ongoing.

Thanks again for joining the debate!

17940 -
modify delete 18040 - Reply from Korla10 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-10

In my own opinions, the shift towards digital news can be rewarding in few ways such as it's convenience and wide variety of topics easy to access on any handheld or stationary device. Even though technology is not going to stop progressing, digital news still has it's many drawbacks. Firstly, headlines and front page photographs can be easily misunderstood and spread through the World Wide web like wild fire. People are not taking the time to read or process information like they used to. Next, people from all over the world can write and post articles on social media accounts on anything, even on topics and issues they don't know the slightest things about. People giving news about what they think they know, is different from a professional who has experience on sifting out the truth and writing it down exceptionally well. Online news sources and personal opinion articles on social media has become almost a blurred line. Though someone might not be riding under the name of a journal or big paper company because more people in today's time has become very passive about things, it is as if the big papers has boiled down to nothing but rumors and gossip and personal columns have taken the place of the big papers, leaving people to believe anything that comes into their eyes or ears. Lastly online news seems to be less and less human touch and more filtered and biased. Not all new resources are deceitful but the good ones are becoming harder to find.    I think that it is okay for some news to be funded by the government, but not all of it. As Abram has so rightly  pointed out "Whenever the government socializes businesses, those businesses soon fail," and I happen to agree with that. It is self evident. There is a limit to how much the government can control and once that line is crossed it can be hard to get back to what it once was.    Occasionally I like to listen to TPR, Texas Public Radio, and often I find some program segments to be biased or untrue. That is why I am glad that America has a free market economy.  When that happens I can turn to another a number of other radio stations that are either independent or funded by the government and hear their point of view on an issue. That is what I like about America. I have the freedom of choice. I can choose for myself what I listen to and agree with whomever I please.  In your country, can you choose to do that? Even if you despise independent news sources, do you have the choice to decide what you feed your mind? Or have you become so narrow-minded that you are not aware that you can agree to disagree? Arguments are very limp with no supporting evidence do not win. If you refuse to agree. May you just open up and say that  you agree to disagree or is that such a burden was well?
Much thanks to those that read this through, whether you agree or disagree, remember to always speak up. Peace, Korla

17940 -
modify delete 18037 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-10

Hello Raphael!

I'm sure you're a fine person! Just perhaps a little aggravated; politics can do that to us sometimes. Don't sweat it!

I hope at least somebody watching realizes that I am NOT defending America. It is nearly as flawed as Canada.

I hope somebody else will comment on this thread as Raphael seems to be out of arguments.

But to Raphael: thanks so much for your timely reply and devotion to at least what you think is a good cause! It's been very entertaining to debate with you.

Thanks again!

17940 -
modify delete 18036 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-09

No, you're right, I'm an evil and tyrannical leftie from Canadistan, I came to invade the glorious and perfect USA, so I'll be able to impose my horrible values of justice and social equality.

And you're a hero, a god defending liberty against dangerous and dark left-wingers. God bless America! 🇺🇸

17940 -
modify delete 18033 - Reply from Abram15 , 15 yrs (USA) - 2018-02-08

Hello Raphael!

Like I said, this debate is not America vs. Canada; we're only trying to tease out the relative merits and disadvantages of governmental system, whether they apply to North Korea, Iraq, or Saudi Arabia. I think Canada is a wonderful country overall, if that makes a difference.

My comment "You have done well in regurgitating the garbled propaganda of all governments," is not actually a blind accusation; What you are saying is actually what many governments say all of the time. I would still like to know what my other blind accusations were so that I might explain, or atone, for them.

I want to reiterate what I said on the other thread; you will automatically concede the debate if you can no longer answer my arguments with arguments of your own.

Thank You!

17940 -
modify delete 18031 - Reply from Raphaël233 , 14 yrs (Canada) - 2018-02-08

You see, THAT one was actually a blind accusation. And yes, I'm an evil Frenchy kitten-eater, a hypocrite from Soviet Canuckistan!

Return to the previous page
Go to the next page

We strongly recommand to not include your personal address & phone number in your messages. we accept no responsibility for consequences of message exchanges.
Forum about Debates - Society - (c) Etudiants du Monde / Students of the World
if any remark / question, please contact the webmaster: