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.


FB
Facebook addict? Check out our page and become a fan because you love us!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Curtix

Reward Points:41
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.
90%
Arguments:44
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
10 most recent arguments.
1 point

I have no idea what you're ranting about

I am ranting because not only are you using a statistic that has no relevance to your debate and if it earns you any support that support is not justified by the lack of relevance; it is also annoying because your arguments are so all over the place that it is impossible to properly dispute or support every statement you make. Not only would I have to argue about your point of view in this debate, I would also have to dispute the nature of the statistic, the relevance of the statistic, and any other fallacy you through in while disputing disputes. When the statistic has nothing to do the argument and could just be left off to save everyone time.

regardless of the percentage

Then don't include it.

2 points

"93% of all abortions occur for social reasons (i.e. the child is unwanted or inconvenient)"

Sounds like a completely unbiased source. Why would someone pick out two very specific reasons that total 7% and then lump everything else together and label it greed?

If you want to argue about the nature of that 93% make a debate about that. Don't post it in an unrelated debate.

I'm by no means an abortion activist. I'm by no means an activist. I'm not even active. But I cannot stand ridiculous arguments like this. That "statistic" has nothing to do with the men being enslaved by child support.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appeal_to_pity

Before you hit submit please stop to think "Is this a valid point/question/debate or am I being a douche?"

2 points

Wow those liberals are a bunch of selfish jerks. Clearly they only care about taking money from rich people.

1 point

While "justifications" 1-7 all seem like valid reasons to change something to me (assuming they are true when being used), i don't know why you post this garbage other than if you just want to keep your name on the top of the weekly leader board.

edit:maybe not six, but when six is the case, usually one of the others are at play as well.

8 points

well we can't change it to "in gold we trust" now can we?

2 points

So what you are saying is that you are actually saying nothing. Ok.

1 point

Work smarter not harder.

You sound like my father, "If it seems good it must be bad, we did it differently back in my day."

If we want change why would we want something that is worse?

That is why liberal views might seem easier imo, but I won't agree with you that it has anything to do with responsibility and consequences.

Also because conservatives are assholes.

1 point

Ohhhhhhhh, i see, your posts are all full of satire. I was beginning to think you were just super conservative. Glad to hear.

5 points

The same reason some resist nationalized health care.

Most people don't think about how their opinions affect others before devoting their time into spreading those opinions.

2 points

Here is Nationalized Health Care in a nutshell:

The entire purpose of a government is to provide for the people those services that are more easily attained as a group than as an individual. Its easier for us all to pitch in(via taxes) and pave all of the roads, rather than everyone pave their own. Its easier for everyone to pitch in to pay for law enforcement than for everyone to have to defend themselves.

The entire purpose of health insurance is to spread a highly variable cost over a large group so that the burden of cost is evenly distributed over time and its members. The larger the group the more evenly it is spread.

The largest group in the United States of America is the United States of America. Health insurance is most effective as a national service. There are no holes in that logic, if you think you have found one please tell me and i will explain words to you.

The only problems that come up are problems of implementation. That's why people use examples of Canadians coming to the US for healthcare because the waits are too long. I for one have never thought to myself "If the Canadians can't do it right there is no way we can do it right."

I'm sure Obama's plan has problems. He is a politician just like any other leader in our country and has to make compromises and go out on limbs to get things done. But how often does a policy get put into place and it is perfect immediately and never reformed or changed? Nationalized healthcare might be bumpy at first, but it will be so much better in the long run.

Curtix has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


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