I want to see...

[Cy Tolliver]

Someone challenge someone to the Cage!

[BRUCE]

Someone challenge someone to the Cage!

PLEASE!

Good Idea by the way Bruce.

Thanks, Fuze!  Bring the pain, someone!

[Eyeball Chambers]

BUMP!

[Hugo Chavez]

Helo Bruce, get back to me with dem rules   PM me bro... Let's get this going... Everyone likes this idea.

[240 is Back]

i wanna see a cage match!

[BRUCE]

Helo Bruce, get back to me with dem rules   PM me bro... Let's get this going... Everyone likes this idea.

Ah, Christ.  I knew someone was holding this process up - me. 

I promise to get round to it mate, meanwhile I've been busy trying to challenge people.  Any takers?

[Debussey]

Ah, Christ.  I knew someone was holding this process up - me. 

I promise to get round to it mate, meanwhile I've been busy trying to challenge people.  Any takers?

Debussey accepts next week. Debussey has some work to do now, but when it is done: Bring it.

-> Let us discuss: Abortion.

[BRUCE]

Debussey accepts next week. Debussey has some work to do now, but when it is done: Bring it.

-> Let us discuss: Abortion.

Excellent!  Can you be a little more specific with the topic, though?  I need to know what it is exactly you're disagreeing with me on.

[Debussey]

Excellent!  Can you be a little more specific with the topic, though?  I need to know what it is exactly you're disagreeing with me on.

What is most important?

The mothers right to decide over her own body (= abortions -> legal), or the fetus "right to live" (= abortions-> not legal any more).

2 subissues:

-> The moral aspect: What is good moral? Letting the mother decide over her own body and life? "Saving" the life of the fetus?
-> The practical issue: Should abortions be legal? Or should abortions only be allowed in certain cases where the mothers life is in danger? -> If so, where should the limit go? Who has the right to decide? Is a 14 year old rape victim a good candidate for an abortion? What about a 20 year college student with student loans that was a bit reckless at a party? (If she does not get an abortion, her college degree will go down the drain, she does not want the child at all, and she will still have the loans. Should the "fetus right to live" count more than the mothers burden?)


Important: Debussey will not prepare in advance for this, and time is still limited. Debussey = looking forward to a good "battle" though. Debussey might even learn something. The new brain implant has given Debussey some extra brainpower.

[BRUCE]

What is most important?

The mothers right to decide over her own body (= abortions -> legal), or the fetus "right to live" (= abortions-> not legal any more).

2 subissues:

-> The moral aspect: What is good moral? Letting the mother decide over her own body and life? "Saving" the life of the fetus?
-> The practical issue: Should abortions be legal? Or should abortions only be allowed in certain cases where the mothers life is in danger? -> If so, where should the limit go? Who has the right to decide? Is a 14 year old rape victim a good candidate for an abortion? What about a 20 year college student with student loans that was a bit reckless at a party? (If she does not get an abortion, her college degree will go down the drain, she does not want the child at all, and she will still have the loans. Should the "fetus right to live" count more than the mothers burden?)

Important: Debussey will not prepare in advance for this, and time is still limited. Debussey = looking forward to a good "battle" though. Debussey might even learn something. The new brain implant has given Debussey some extra brainpower.

Okay, all good points mate - here's what I think should happen.

Abortion is obviously an incredibly complex issue, how about we both map out our arguments within an essay as if we were simply writing an opinionative piece, minus an opponent.  The audience can then judge whose piece was more persuasive and accurate.  I think this will allow us to explore more broadly the topic at hand.

It's hard for me to gauge, or remember exactly, where you stand on every sub-issue within the abortion category.  Let's just get a solid 500 words down on paper about our thoughts on it as a point of discussion.

Good idea?

[Debussey]

Okay, all good points mate - here's what I think should happen.

Abortion is obviously an incredibly complex issue, how about we both map out our arguments within an essay as if we were simply writing an opinionative piece, minus an opponent.  The audience can then judge whose piece was more persuasive and accurate.  I think this will allow us to explore more broadly the topic at hand.
It's hard for me to gauge, or remember exactly, where you stand on every sub-issue within the abortion category.  Let's just get a solid 500 words down on paper about our thoughts on it as a point of discussion.

Good idea?

1: Debussey does not think everybody should be allowed to vote. Certain members show a lack of intelligence that makes them unable to understand the complexity of this topic, which in turn makes them jump to irrational conclusions without ever giving room for reason. This board does not attract these kinds of people, but there are some nuts out there that should be excluded, or forced to stay within certain boundaries.

2: Good idea. Debussey will probably use a lot of visual figures to examplify it's points instead of words, since Gary often communicates in visual figures with Debussey via telepathy .

3: Yes, very good idea.

[Camel Jockey]

Okay, all good points mate - here's what I think should happen.

Abortion is obviously an incredibly complex issue, how about we both map out our arguments within an essay as if we were simply writing an opinionative piece, minus an opponent.  The audience can then judge whose piece was more persuasive and accurate.  I think this will allow us to explore more broadly the topic at hand.

Not a bad idea. One complete essay beats back and forth posts. 

[OzmO]

Shouldn't each side be allowed 1 retort?


Just a thought.

[BRUCE]

1: Debussey does not think everybody should be allowed to vote. Certain members show a lack of intelligence that makes them unable to understand the complexity of this topic, which in turn makes them jump to irrational conclusions without ever giving room for reason. This board does not attract these kinds of people, but there are some nuts out there that should be excluded, or forced to stay within certain boundaries.

Completely agree, I don't believe in consensus alone determining the 'correct' opinion.

If we relied on this to guide us, we'd still believe the earth was flat.

Shouldn't each side be allowed 1 retort?
Just a thought.

Good idea, mate - I think we'll develop this as the concept grows.

[Debussey]

Completely agree, I don't believe in consensus alone determining the 'correct' opinion.

If we relied on this to guide us, we'd still believe the earth was flat.

Good idea, mate - I think we'll develop this as the concept grows.

Agree.