The Debate Hall Social Thread

[Reaver197]

Congrats, Savon.

**** em up in Dallas.

 

[Sieguest]

damn feels good to be back

How come I have the feeling that not so long after I post this, I'll see that you will have been banned again? (Stop getting banned dangit!)

I qualified for nationals at the NFL Louisiana State debate tournament.

Going against the best people in my state, I got 2rd in Student Congress, 2nd in Public Forum Debate, and 3nd in Extemporaneous speaking. I will be going to Dallas for nationals in June.

Good stuff bro. Congrats!

 

[Dre89]

That's pretty cool Savon, what topics do you debate?

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

too much time spent in the Brawl boards

can't help it man

 

[Savon]

That's pretty cool Savon, what topics do you debate?

In Public Forum Debate we actually have a topic that changes monthly. The current topic is

Resolved: North Korea poses a more serious threat to national security than Iran.

I actually was going to ask you guys to help me develop my case for the next upcoming State tournament in a few weeks. I could actually leave it here or make a topic later. Either way I would love some arguments from you guys. Keep in mind Public Forum Debate is more about evidence than theory. I will show you guys the current copy of my case later when I finish my homework.

 

[rvkevin]

I actually was going to ask you guys to help me develop my case for the next upcoming State tournament in a few weeks.

Which side do you have?

 

[Savon]

The sides switch up each round. You need to build a strong case for the affirmative as well as the negative.

 

[KrazyGlue]

Alright, sounds awesome. Good luck! We'll be happy to help you out in any way possible. If you need both sides, you could probably just create a topic and then you'll see both sides of the issue.

 

[Sieguest]

Happy St. Patrick's Day guys. :D

Now to find a topic that concerns the Irish to celebrate.... any ideas?

 

[Dre89]

The only one I can think of is the handball incident in the Word Cup qualifiers.

Or maybe whether it's wrong to assign terroism exclusively to Muslims, seeing as the Irish were terroists too, and terroism was a Christian invention.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Celebrate. Not grind into the dust.

Also, speaking of christianity...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARwqm83k2Zg

How are my thoughts during that video? Fair and balanced enough for ya?

 

[Dragoon Fighter]

Does anyone have a link to the complete speech from which the following quote comes from...

Originally posted by Martin Luther King Jr.
"Darkness cannot drive out darkness; only light can do that. Hate cannot drive out hate; only love can do that."

I wish to know more and possible depending on my mood build a debate around it.

 

[KrazyGlue]

Does anyone have a link to the complete speech from which the following quote comes from...



I wish to know more and possible depending on my mood build a debate around it.

It's from a sermon in a book of his sermons entitled Strength To Love.

I searched it on Google Books, searched for the quote you listed, and here's the page where it comes up: http://books.google.com/books?id=er...&q=darkness cannot drive out darkness&f=false

That particular speech starts at the end of page 52, the previous page to the one I gave you.

 

[Sieguest]

Celebrate. Not grind into the dust.

Also, speaking of christianity...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ARwqm83k2Zg

How are my thoughts during that video? Fair and balanced enough for ya?

You bring up an interesting point. The only thing about it is, the scriptural quotes you pull are from when people lived under "Levitical Law" (aka you screw up, you're dead, nothing else but what is right shall be tolerated). As of now, if you speak to many Christians ( at least those that don't fit the common stereotype) you'll find that many say that we live under "Grace" now.

I also feel you've grouped many Christians into this one interpretation of a intolerant group that place themselves on moral pedestals. And I can see why one would think that, I see it myself even around where I live, but that doesn't mean that every Christian is like that, so I feel that may take a bit away from the argument.

Very interesting video, do you have others?

 

[Aesir]

THIS JUST IN DONALD TRUMP IS CONCERNED OBAMA MIGHT NOT BE A US CITIZEN!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_yZqIHDGy0w

 

[KrazyGlue]

No, he was born in Kenya, remember? I heard it from Mike Huckabee, so it must be right. I mean, this guy is one of the leading republican potential presidential candidates, so he must be reliable, right?

 

[Sieguest]

Nah KG, Trump knows his facts so I'm pretty sure he knows what he's talking about. I mean he is on national television so he definitely wouldn't want to be wrong.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

THIS JUST IN DONALD TRUMP IS CONCERNED OBAMA MIGHT NOT BE A US CITIZEN!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=_yZqIHDGy0w

God dammit is that still not dead? Faith in humanity has slipped another notch.

You bring up an interesting point. The only thing about it is, the scriptural quotes you pull are from when people lived under "Levitical Law" (aka you screw up, you're dead, nothing else but what is right shall be tolerated). As of now, if you speak to many Christians ( at least those that don't fit the common stereotype) you'll find that many say that we live under "Grace" now.

This I don't quite understand... the scripture demands it, from what I have heard Jesus himself said that the old scripture should be upheld and not removed/changed, so how can you make that claim? Should you not technically still live under "Levitical Law", as the scriptures demand? Where does this "grace" come from? As far as I am aware, the whole "Jesus's Grace" thing only applies to the afterlife.

I also feel you've grouped many Christians into this one interpretation of a intolerant group that place themselves on moral pedestals. And I can see why one would think that, I see it myself even around where I live, but that doesn't mean that every Christian is like that, so I feel that may take a bit away from the argument.

Howso? While not every christian claims a higher moral authority due to their religion, I find it beyond nonsensical to call yourself a christian while not adhering to the holy book of the christian religion–it would really be like calling yourself a nazi, and then ignoring basically all of the tenants of the national socialistic program. And when said holy book commands something, how can you deny it?

Very interesting video, do you have others?

All on that channel. I'm still working on more.

 

[Aesir]

So as you all recall, Obama released a copy of his birth certificate in response to his "background." But in response to that conservatives said it's not the real document, and refuse to accept a copy. (even though it's against Hawaiian state law to let birth certificates leave the state.

Well Donald Trump along with his giant head piece decided to one up Obama and release his birth certificate, HOWEVER THIS ENDED UP TO BE A COPY AS WELL!

So I must ask Mr. Trump, what is he trying to hide?!?!

I'll tell you what, HE'S SECRETLY GERMAN AND ISN'T A NATURAL BORN CITIZEN!!!!!

 

[Dre89]

BPC you're arguments only really work if the Christian has a Scripture exclusive interpretation.

 

[Sieguest]

This I don't quite understand... the scripture demands it, from what I have heard Jesus himself said that the old scripture should be upheld and not removed/changed, so how can you make that claim? Should you not technically still live under "Levitical Law", as the scriptures demand? Where does this "grace" come from? As far as I am aware, the whole "Jesus's Grace" thing only applies to the afterlife.

No, we don't live under Levitical Law because if God says "don't turn around" and I turn around I'm not going to be turned into a pillar of salt. We should adhere to the principles taught in olden scripture, not necessarily the ensuing consequence imposed upon transgressors via through people or some other act.

The omission of "angry" retribution is the living under "grace" I was talking about.

Disclaimer: My answers are based from my interpretation of the Bible and my experience in the Christian religion. Not every Christian would answer the same way as I would so this isn't a uniform "Christian" response.

Howso? While not every christian claims a higher moral authority due to their religion, I find it beyond nonsensical to call yourself a christian while not adhering to the holy book of the christian religion–it would really be like calling yourself a nazi, and then ignoring basically all of the tenants of the national socialistic program. And when said holy book commands something, how can you deny it?

Following Holy Book<>Better than thou mentality, which is the mentality that you imposed upon Christians.

All on that channel. I'm still working on more.

Thanks, I'll probably look at some more when I have some free time.

 

[Aesir]

I'm going to take a very different approach to the god debate when I get back from my all nighter, it should be interesting. Just so you all know, HUGE MIND ****S ARE ON THE HORIZON.


Translation; I'm making a god thread.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

BPC you're arguments only really work if the Christian has a Scripture exclusive interpretation.

See this is still something I can't wrap my head around. That you can be a christian without belief in the word of the bible. It just doesn't make sense to me; what "defines" a christian if not belief in the bible? Just as I cannot imagine a Muslim without belief in the Qu'ran, and can't imagine a Scientologist without brainwashing, a christian who does not believe in the word of the bible simply makes no sense to me. What else defines a christian? At what point does the faith stop being defined as Christianity? I feel like I could start sacrificing babies to satan and still be able to call it a Christian denomination. Or? I simply do not understand this at all; the definition of "Christian" has to end somewhere. Ignoring the scripture seems like a good end.

No, we don't live under Levitical Law because if God says "don't turn around" and I turn around I'm not going to be turned into a pillar of salt. We should adhere to the principles taught in olden scripture, not necessarily the ensuing consequence imposed upon transgressors via through people or some other act.

The omission of "angry" retribution is the living under "grace" I was talking about.

Disclaimer: My answers are based from my interpretation of the Bible and my experience in the Christian religion. Not every Christian would answer the same way as I would so this isn't a uniform "Christian" response.

Hmm... See again, I'm confused. Leaving the whole "I don't believe in scripture" thing behind, we have things like Leviticus chapter 20, which clearly commands punishing various things with death, and then Jesus confirms via Mark 5:17-18/Matt 19:17-21 that in fact the scripture should be upheld... What am I missing here? What's the mental gymnastics that would make that fit for the 21st century?

Following Holy Book<>Better than thou mentality, which is the mentality that you imposed upon Christians.

Actually, it's kind of defined by said holy book that christians are better than other people. And by that I mean the (infallible) book itself says so.

 

[Dre89]

BPC- Different denominations have different reasons for following the Bible. In the Catholicism, the Bible is validated as the word of God because the Church says it is so. Belief that the Bible is the word of God is a teaching within Catholicism, not that which does the teachings.

Then you have most Protestant denominations which are Scripture exclusive, who don't believe it's the WoG because of the Catholic Church. I guess the fact that they consider Scripture to be the sole authority is the reason they remove books from the original Scripture that they don't like.

This is why I find the concepts of mere Christianity and non denomination Christianity so stupid, because different denominations have different reasons for initially believing it is the WoG, and those reasons conflict with those of other denominations. So non-denoms don't have a reason for believing it outside of environmental influence or blind faith.

 

[Ganonsburg]

BPC, here are some short articles that address your question. If you're interested in the debate rather than the answers, sorry for cheating you on that, haha. They're fairly short and to the point, so don't worry about losing a lot of time reading these.

http://www.gotquestions.org/Christian-law.html

And more on the law of Christ:
http://www.gotquestions.org/law-of-Christ.html

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

The banner to that site makes me want to puke. Reminds me of AnswersInGenesis. I'll look at that tomorrow, I have to sleep right now.

 

[Theftz22]

I'm going to take a very different approach to the god debate...HUGE MIND ****S ARE ON THE HORIZON.

Over promised, under delivered.

 

[Aesir]

Over promised, under delivered.

Capital letters are sarcasm, plus you're new so you probably don't understand my sense of humor anyway which is fine. I'm pretty sure most of the older people saw that and were like. "oh jesus."


Secondly it's a pretty basic question, So if you were expecting something great, especially on an internet message board, a gaming one especially you better drop your expectations a notch.

 

[Sucumbio]

I'm curious as to why everyone has God on the mind. I mean, when I first joined the DH there was no God debates anywhere really, not in the PG or in the DH. But since then there's been an eruption that vets thought would just be "another" passing phase of the usual drib drab, but ... it's not. There's just no end in sight to these... moralistic, scientific, deconstructions, abstractions, philosophies, theories... why, I wonder?

I mean, it's not even a good debate topic, now is it? There's hardly any data that can be applied to biblical rationalizations, they're accounts... historical "records" of goings on centuries ago. Parables, fables, bedtime stories, lol. Why is it so compelling to argue for or against the validity of it? Believers believe, so they shouldn't require a defense of their belief, unless their belief is faulty, waning, or unfounded. Non-believers don't believe, so unless they're really just rude, why try to impose your non-belief on someone else?

Or am I missing something, and that's not what "god debates" are about? They're not about the 2 sides of the same coin, battling for who's got the shinier emblem? Well I for one have had enough, but that's not to say I don't approve of them, you guys can talk God until your fingers fall off. I just felt I needed to get that out there. kbyenow

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

I'm really rude.

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

being rude is fun

wtf

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Fun fact: GSB is not April Fools friendly. I had been in fairly harsh debate with theists there, and so this morning I made a thread saying that a video on youtube made me convert to christianity... Guess which. They suspended me, lol.

 

[A Pimp Named Slickback]

what the **** does The Black Plague replace?

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

A determined article....

 

[RDK]

This place is still going on? Haha, oh wow.

 

[Budget Player Cadet_]

Hi RDK, where have you been?

 

[Sieguest]

RDK's been sending me daughters even though I asked for sons....

I do not approve.

 

[ballin4life]

I wrote an essay once about how your motivational and rhetorical tactics were ineffective Mr. Fang.

 

[Sieguest]

Why you spineless........ Since when did men write essays?

 

[ballin4life]

I was unsuited for the rage of war


The key change was excellent though; I'll give you that