Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day

Welcome to Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day!

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.

Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.

Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!

Report This User
Permanent Delete

View All

View All

View All

RSS Ramshutu

Reward Points:227
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
Efficiency Monitor

6 most recent arguments.
2 points

Why not?

Because if there is no implication in your post you have essentially posted an argument in support of a statement that doesn't actually support the argument.

2 points

Hold on, wait.

So answering the question "Do we have to respect everyone's beliefs?" In the affirmative and posting a justification "Mhm. It would stop wars."

Can not in any way shape or form logically be construed to mean or imply "Respecting peoples beliefs would stop wars; and that is a positive reason to hold the affirmative position".

Can you please explain why that is not the logical implication of your original post in small, logical steps

Because that fundamental implication of your post is what I am countering.

Unless, for some reason, you pressed the wrong button and posted in the wrong column...

2 points

You originally said: Mhm. It would stop wars in support of the resolution.

I would like you to enlighten me as to why you think that me stating (effectively) "well, given history, that's not always a good thing", is not a valid dispute to raise on that statement.

Ramshutu(227) Clarified
2 points

So what was your point?

That stopping wars isn't always a good thing by explicitly pointing out that the key wars that would indeed have been stopped by respecting peoples beliefs are arguably the wars that most needed to be fought for the good of humanity in general.

2 points

Yes; such respect of other peoples beliefs would have arguably stopped World War 2 and the American Civil War.

While most definitely not in all cases, in many situations it has only been the challenging and NOT respecting peoples beliefs that have brought about every landmark change in attitudes that has led to increased rights for all.

Slavery, Womens Suffrage, Equal Rites, The End Nazism, and many other horrors of our history have arguably only ever been brought about by a group of people standing up and pointing out how stupid the other person beliefs are.

While granted these are not religion, which is sort of implied but not stated at the top of this debate: Several religions are actively trying to bring about similar aspects of the above.

2 points

There is a major, significant and massive difference between respecting someones right to have a belief and respecting the belief itself.

If beliefs had no effect on any other person other than the believer, then it maybe fair that we should respect peoples beliefs as they by definition have no effect on anyone else.

However, in a world where different peoples beliefs or exercising of those beliefs often involve affecting other people, be it via indoctrination, violence, mistreatement, curtailing of rights or imposing of some portion of that belief on others; then that belief should not ever HAVE to be respected simply because it is their belief.

Ramshutu has not yet created any debates.

About Me

Biographical Information
Gender: Male
Marital Status: Single
Political Party: Other
Country: United Kingdom
Religion: Atheist
Education: Masters

Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here