Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day


Micmacmoc's Waterfall RSS

This personal waterfall shows you all of Micmacmoc's arguments, looking across every debate.
1 point

The title is the winning argument in itself. There is no way that you can treat everybody equally because some people are accustomed to being treated differently, and for that reason you have to respect differences and adapt to what others expect

Micmacmoc(2259) Clarified
1 point

Is a friend of a friend you, by any chance?

0 points

Not the ones in my head, Chaffy.

1 point

Well, I really hope my friends wouldn't take their first opportunity to do that.

2 points

I don't think that any President who doesn't win a war for America will be remembered especially well. The same applies for a lot of countries after they get bored of their current leader.

For example, a lot of Prime Ministers in England are remembered badly or not at all, but Prime Ministers such as Winston Churchill, who was the PM during World War Two, is remembered with respect and will be for his 'good speeches' and comfort he provided. I don't think that's especially exceptional for a head of state, though. Many people in the conservative party are good speakers, but I doubt they will be remembered as much as iconic, successful war leaders, such as Winston Churchill.

1 point

I had such a variety of options there. 'I like worms' - which I don't - and 'I hate birds' - which I don't are great options - thanks.

It is also a pretty weird debate. I think though, if the saying is accurate, then you should sleep in late. If I were a worm I would be sleeping in late - then I could do all sorts of interesting things when I was alive; I wouldn't be able to do anything if I were dead, would I?

Although, I think that I would rather be the bird than the worm in the first place.

Micmacmoc(2259) Clarified
1 point

What photo-editor did you use for that?

1 point

The only problem is that some people couldn't afford to test their stupidity, so maybe a smaller fee would be better. True, it wouldn't determine if they were extremely stupid or just having a laugh, but it would still show some results for the people that entered the money. If someone did decide to save up to test on $100 then that is really stupid, for they would have had time to think it over - but if you were that stupid maybe that wouldn't be the case, the writing would be a bigger barrier.

1 point

It is probably the most annoying answer.

1 point

Why shouldn't we be able to focus on two things at once? Almost any person on the planet, no matter what their gender is, can focus on two things like watching television and talking at the same time, and why shouldn't we be able to do that? Admittedly, if people talk too loudly it cannot be done but if not the details can be comprehended as well as the conversation.

1 point

I think that an important variable is how much the female cares about cute puppies.

1 point

Not all fictional books are scientifically inaccurate. Some are very accurate, including H.I.V.E., Alex Rider, and Peppa Pig!

1 point

This is a complete waste of time and I cannot believe you have just wasted so many seconds of my life reading that and writing this argument.

1 point

We should ask for a glass of water and then begin to abduct them, fly away a bit, and decide whether to annihalate them to sustain the lives of humans (so we don't have to share resources) or make peace with them and use them to our advantage.

1 point

Ha ha - you're good at something! No, it doesn't have the same effect. The tangible world that I can experience is good for ME. Maybe not for other people.

1 point

Are you saying that the view of the people who have a voice that deserves to be heard cannot be heard?

2 points

To begin with, I do not think that religious groups would want to change their own traditions of the word marriage for others who they may feel have mistreated the word.

Next I would like to ask why they would spend two million pounds on a word when people in other countries can 'only see God in the form of food they are so hungry'. Two million pounds would buy a lot of food.

Finally I would like to ask another rhetorical question, why on Earth would they want to replace a word that has united people together for more millenia than I know of?

This brings me to a conclusion that any religious group is unlikely to want to change a 'holy' word.

1 point

Comparing someone in the modern world, where discrimination is illegal and women have equal rights to men, reminds me of the slave trade. Slaves were considered as an ornament and discriminated against. The unfair idea that in the modern day this should be brought back is preposterous.



Results Per Page: [12] [24] [48] [96]