Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Controversial Questions

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Controversial Questions

    Should creationism and evolution be treated with the same importance when taught in schools?

    Most current abortion legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks, do you feel this is a reasonable timescale?

    Should welfare be restricted only to those who have paid into the system?

    Tighter controls on immigration will lead to labour shortages, do you agree or disagree?

    Does giving the general populace easy access to firearms make a society safer or more prone to violence?

    Are obesity and alcoholism diseases?

  • #2
    Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
    Should creationism and evolution be treated with the same importance when taught in schools?
    Creationism is not science per se, so it shouldn't. It's a matter of relligion lessons.

    Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
    Most current abortion legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks, do you feel this is a reasonable timescale?
    No, to me it's too liberal. I support my country's legislation concerning this matter (abortion only in case of a threat of health/ life of a mother, or in case of rape)

    Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
    Should welfare be restricted only to those who have paid into the system?
    Welfare should be restricted to all in the first place. I don't support this kind of help from state.

    Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
    Tighter controls on immigration will lead to labour shortages, do you agree or disagree?
    It may lead to it, but if that's the case then why import muslims not e.g. asians? They're more polite and not terrorist.

    Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
    Does giving the general populace easy access to firearms make a society safer or more prone to violence?
    I'd go with safer. But excluding schools and US is the first example here.

    Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
    Are obesity and alcoholism diseases?
    Of course, both are. No amount of sjw whining will change it.
    http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/...20100803203515

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
      Should creationism and evolution be treated with the same importance when taught in schools?
      No way. Creationism is a bullshit and must be deleted out of schools if somewhere didn't yet.
      Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
      Most current abortion legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks, do you feel this is a reasonable timescale?
      It's quite reasonable. Perhaps it could be more if it's possible.
      Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
      Should welfare be restricted only to those who have paid into the system?
      Yes, or abolish state's aid at all and let charity organisations do it if they wish.
      Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
      Tighter controls on immigration will lead to labour shortages, do you agree or disagree?
      Yes, it can lead to the shortages if this control is redundant.
      Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
      Does giving the general populace easy access to firearms make a society safer or more prone to violence?
      safer, of course.
      Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
      Are obesity and alcoholism diseases?
      well, it can considered as diseases when it's at huge extent and makes real troubles.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by jordan_rudess View Post
        No, to me it's too liberal. I support my country's legislation concerning this matter (abortion only in case of a threat of health/ life of a mother, or in case of rape)
        Things can't be too liberal. The more liberal the better. And what if a woman got pregnant accidentaly? She need not a damned child and still have to give birth spoiling her health and body?

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by jordan_rudess View Post

          Of course, both are. No amount of sjw whining will change it.
          As far as i know, SJW's see those things as diseases also, so you're actually on the same wavelength there.

          http://obesity.procon.org/view.answe...stionID=001611

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by ChiQ View Post

            As far as i know, SJW's see those things as diseases also, so you're actually on the same wavelength there.

            http://obesity.procon.org/view.answe...stionID=001611
            Looks it depends on sjw then

            https://danceswithfat.wordpress.com/...s-the-problem/
            http://vignette4.wikia.nocookie.net/...20100803203515

            Comment


            • #7
              A very decent thread here for a change. I will consider the questions and make a reply when I have more time to give indepth answers.

              Comment


              • #8
                1 "Should creationism and evolution be treated with the same importance when taught in schools?"

                Annoyingly enough I would have to try and be impartial on this one as there is no definitive answer, not to your question about should these subjects be treated with the same importance in schools but rather more does one of these subjects have more merit than the other truth-wise which may be nearer to the crux of the matter!

                Both sides claim to have evidence with evolution claiming to have proof, however creationism by their own admittance especially on their main websites discourages their followers of ever claiming proof! In fact if you look at one of creationists main websites;

                https://answersingenesis.org/creatio...-shouldnt-use/

                Creationism is quite a sinister cult in my opinion looking at the narrative regarding what they should and should not argue about so as they don't look foolish in public! However i'm sure creationists would venture to say similar hyperboles regarding people indulging in the theory of evolution! The only real answer is if one is even the slightest bit skeptical about is there or isn't there a God just flick a coin!

                Bottom line is really both theories rely on faith more than proof so on that basis both should have the right to the same importance when/if taught at schools, may god have mercy on my soul!

                2 "Most current abortion legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks, do you feel this is a reasonable timescale?"

                Yup, I have always thought this is such a horrendous decision that no woman in her right mind would take it lightly at that timescale!

                3 "Should welfare be restricted only to those who have paid into the system? "

                Sort of contadicts the point of a welfare system, so no!

                4 "Tighter controls on immigration will lead to labour shortages, do you agree or disagree?"

                I would rather a country be short on labour manpower to a degree than overflowing to a point where thousands/millions of men/women stand idle, hungry and poorly dressed!

                5 "Does giving the general populace easy access to firearms make a society safer or more prone to violence?"

                Hmmmm look to the USA, however then look to statistics via populous and do the math. Then of course look to Somalia etc.

                6 "Are obesity and alcoholism diseases?"

                Ah well a subject close to both my hearts! I would say yes, but of course I would consider them both self indulgent man made diseases that without the self inflicted symptoms would not need the burden of a financial state funded treatment if you are lucky enough to be in that sort of system!

                In a site generally devoid of anything other than trolling-matter you have supplied a great thread imo ChiQ.

                Comment


                • #9

                  Should creationism and evolution be treated with the same importance when taught in schools?

                  It shouldn't. Despite of the fact that I am a Christian, I wouldn't support Creationism to be taught at schools, for a very simple reason, there is single and definite interpretation of how it worked. Yes, there is the Bible that plainly describes how the life was started, yet there are a lot of missing points, this is exactly what science is figuring out. The Intelligent Design theory has no any empirical data, even though there are scientists who claimed they had found fossils to prove Young Earth theory, these materials have not been recognized officially yet. So, my point is, the material, children are given at schools, should be objective, without personal interpretation, and with that, children will learn to make conclusions on their own. As an alternative, there are religious institutes that promote the conception of Intelligent Design (however, even within these institutes, the theory of evolution should not be dismissed).

                  Most current abortion legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks, do you feel this is a reasonable timescale?

                  That is a very late-term abortion, it's the period when a fetus could be born and live, therefore, no, it's not a reasonable timescale. However, such cases of late-term abortion are always situation-dependent. If the fetus had been diagnosed with birth defects, or the mother's life is in danger, then, under a strict surveillance of specialists, the abortion can be performed. It's in not that simple (though it's never is), and the special preparations should be made to stop the further infections and etc. I think everything should be done to prevent such late abortions, but sometimes, it's the only option, even with tremendous aftermaths.

                  Should welfare be restricted only to those who have paid into the system?

                  I agree with Cilli that it would contradict the point of welfare. The biggest concern is the welfare system abuse and fraud, and statistically speaking, it's not THAT big. However, more careful checks should exist to spot the fraud and punish them respectively, plus the range of recipients may be reconsidered to define those who are really in need.



                  http://federalsafetynet.com/welfare-fraud.html

                  Tighter controls on immigration will lead to labour shortages, do you agree or disagree?

                  To answer this question, I referred to Japan's economy current problems due to its short of workers. Immigrants are usually a cheap labour and, as a result, an engine for progress. Just like with welfare system, it needs to be controlled. The problem with immigrants is their illegal staying within the country, once it's strictly regulated, the number of tax players will grow and the economy will function steadily.

                  Does giving the general populace easy access to firearms make a society safer or more prone to violence?

                  Safer. The access to firearms is aimed to reduce the crime rate, not the other way around. When you think of gun violance, the first country that comes up is the US, of course. However, if you scrutinize each case, you will see that the attackers had mental issues, were extremely impoverished or had some family issues, and, well, access to guns too. The focus should be made to improve country's general well-being, this includes access to education, sufficient number of workplaces and efficient healthcare. Some statistics again.

                  Gun control is designed to stop people from killing each other, at least that’s what we are always told. Let’s take a look at the data:
                  United Kingdom: The UK enacted its handgun ban in 1996. From 1990 until the ban was enacted, the homicide rate fluctuated between 10.9 and 13 homicides per million. After the ban was enacted, homicides trended up until they reached a peak of 18.0 in 2003. Since 2003, which incidentally was about the time the British government flooded the country with 20,000 more cops, the homicide rate has fallen to 11.1 in 2010. In other words, the 15-year experiment in a handgun ban has achieved absolutely nothing.
                  Ireland: Ireland banned firearms in 1972. Ireland’s homicide rate was fairly static going all the way back to 1945. In that period, it fluctuated between 0.1 and 0.6 per 100,000 people. Immediately after the ban, the murder rate shot up to 1.6 per 100,000 people in 1975. It then dropped back down to 0.4. It has trended up, reaching 1.4 in 2007.
                  Australia: Australia enacted its gun ban in 1996. Murders have basically run flat, seeing only a small spike after the ban and then returning almost immediately to preban numbers. It is currently trending down, but is within the fluctuations exhibited in other nations.
                  Plain and simple. Gun control has no significant impact on murder rates. Removing firearms does not typically create massive lawlessness. It is a moot point. These figures aren’t a secret. Why would the governments of these nations want a disarmed populace? For the answer, it is best to look at a nation that has had long-time gun bans that is currently relaxing their laws. Russia recently relaxed its firearms laws. For the first time in recent memory, a Russian citizen can carry a firearm. The prohibited items speak volumes about what a government’s motive behind disarming the population is. Russia has allowed “smoothbore long barrelled guns, pistols, revolvers, and other firearms, as well as Tasers, and devices equipped with teargas.” That’s almost everything, what is still banned? Rifles. So the Russian government has made it clear that the real objective is to remove rifles from civilian hands. The reasoning is pretty clear: you need rifles to overthrow a government.
                  http://www.mintpressnews.com/the-fac...ontrol/207152/

                  Are obesity and alcoholism diseases?

                  I think yes. I haven't looked at any data on these subjects, but merely from personal observation, they are diseases. However, it's tricky. Such acknowledgments comprise there is a need for treatment, and a free access to it. In my country, there are centeres foralcoholism treatment, and I think they should exist, but the number of times when a patient is provided with free treatment should be regulated.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    I'd like to provide some context and corrections for these statistics.

                    Originally posted by Flaminguera View Post

                    After the ban was enacted, homicides trended up until they reached a peak of 18.0 in 2003. Since 2003, which incidentally was about the time the British government flooded the country with 20,000 more cops, the homicide rate has fallen to 11.1 in 2010.
                    The murder rates in the UK aren't recorded by calender year but by the financial year April - April, so they are recorded as 00-01, 01-02 etc. The terms are rather confusing as it states the UK murder rate, then on the graph it lists the British murder rate, but the statistics themselves only record incidents in England/Wales. It puts the drop in rates down to more police officers, but it doesn't mention the peak of victims include those murdered by Harold Shipman or the 58 Chinese nationals who suffocated in a lorry in the 00-01 stats.

                    Originally posted by Flaminguera View Post
                    Immediately after the ban, the murder rate shot up to 1.6 per 100,000 people in 1975.

                    It appears they read their graph or the statistics wrong, as the murder rate in 1974 was 1.7, taking into account a single day with multiple car bombs that resulted in the death of 33 people and this is why the statistics shot up. An attempt to find out where they got these stats just resulted in finding other sources that used the same wording and copied and pasted it. The rate in 1975 was 0.9.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Should creationism and evolution be treated with the same importance when taught in schools?
                      No. Evidences which delivers creationism theory are very weak, thus only evolution theory should be taught in the school.

                      Most current abortion legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks, do you feel this is a reasonable timescale?
                      Abortion should be legal up to 12 weeks (3 months). 24 Weeks (6 months is a little bit too long time period for my taste)

                      Should welfare be restricted only to those who have paid into the system?
                      No. This isn't the idea behind welfare. Children, disabled people or the old are often people who need such benefits and they aren't able often to earn an income. Nevertheless something as over proportional welfare state should be avoided. Food stamps for the hungry a shelter over heads for the homeless should be enough.

                      Tighter controls on immigration will lead to labour shortages, do you agree or disagree?
                      no. A heavy or a dirty job should be paid accordingly, to find people for such jobs is only a question of money. However wages dumping is a too high immigration effect and very welcome by the industry.

                      Does giving the general populace easy access to firearms make a society safer or more prone to violence?
                      no. In a healthy society aren't firearms needed, in a degenerated one is a firearm a tool against the symptoms, not a cure for the disease.

                      Are obesity and alcoholism diseases?
                      yes. people die because of alcohol and obesity, so I think they are diseases.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
                        Should creationism and evolution be treated with the same importance when taught in schools?

                        Most current abortion legislation allows abortion up to 24 weeks, do you feel this is a reasonable timescale?

                        Should welfare be restricted only to those who have paid into the system?

                        Tighter controls on immigration will lead to labour shortages, do you agree or disagree?

                        Does giving the general populace easy access to firearms make a society safer or more prone to violence?

                        Are obesity and alcoholism diseases?

                        1. No way. Creationism is a fairy tale while evolution is based on science thus it is more important

                        2. No, unless pregnancy endangers a mother's existence. If one is pregnant and doesn't want a baby they should consider abortion much earlier than that in my opinion.

                        3. Welfare should be beneficial mostly to those who have given something to the system rather than to the lazy bones who are just able to whine how hard life is. But there are vulnerable groups of people that need to be supported, or example the disabled. Just in the country I come from welfare is much abused by drunkards who idle so I'm harsh about the issue.

                        4. Disagree. Tighter controls on immigration, especially from islamic places, would lead to safer environment.

                        5. If guns are easily given to morons with psychological problems then a society will be much more unsafe

                        6. yes, people addicted to either food or drugs, alcohol are ill. They need to be treated to overcome their addictions.
                        Last edited by Etsia; 03-30-2017, 05:58 PM.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by ChiQ View Post
                          I'd like to provide some context and corrections for these statistics.

                          The murder rates in the UK aren't recorded by calender year but by the financial year April - April, so they are recorded as 00-01, 01-02 etc. The terms are rather confusing as it states the UK murder rate, then on the graph it lists the British murder rate, but the statistics themselves only record incidents in England/Wales. It puts the drop in rates down to more police officers, but it doesn't mention the peak of victims include those murdered by Harold Shipman or the 58 Chinese nationals who suffocated in a lorry in the 00-01 stats.


                          It appears they read their graph or the statistics wrong, as the murder rate in 1974 was 1.7, taking into account a single day with multiple car bombs that resulted in the death of 33 people and this is why the statistics shot up. An attempt to find out where they got these stats just resulted in finding other sources that used the same wording and copied and pasted it. The rate in 1975 was 0.9.
                          That's a useful piece of information, alas, online statistics is the only source we can go by, even if it might be not accurate enough.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by Etsia View Post
                            1. No way. Creationism is a fairy tale while evolution is based on science thus it is more important
                            I think it's oversimplification. As you know, evolution is focusing on transitions of one type into another, it doesn't really imply where the life started from. Ironically enough, people go to two extremes in matters of religion too. Leave behind the story of life creation within 6 days and just think of the conception of intelligent design based on science. It's far from a fairy tale.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by Flaminguera View Post

                              I think it's oversimplification. As you know, evolution is focusing on transitions of one type into another, it doesn't really imply where the life started from. Ironically enough, people go to two extremes in matters of religion too. Leave behind the story of life creation within 6 days and just think of the conception of intelligent design based on science. It's far from a fairy tale.
                              "intelligent design" is also nonsense and fairy tale. Just the simplest way to explain everything with extrapolation of human consciousness outside.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X