Debate Digest: Teacher-student friendships on Facebook, Law school, Balanced budget amendment, US debt ceiling deal.

All articles

From Debatepedia

Jump to: navigation, search

All pages | Next page (Argument: Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" presents a number of scientific errors)

Argument:A "right" to unfettered gun-ownership exists as a safeguard for citizens against domestic tyranny	Argument:A "soft" partitioning of Iraq would reduce sectarian violence in Iraq	Argument:A Western intervention in Darfur result in a jihadist insurgency
Argument:A Western intervention in Darfur would be followed by an Islamic extremist insurgency	Argument:A Western intervention in Darfur would result in a jihadist insurgency there	Argument:A cap-and-trade creates arbitrary base-lines
Argument:A cap-and-trade system better encourages companies to cut their carbon emissions	Argument:A cap-and-trade system incentivizes reductions in carbon emissions where it can be done most efficiently	Argument:A cap-and-trade system is certain to reduce emissions, which is important in context of the global warming crisis
Argument:A cap-and-trade system is more susceptible to corruption than a carbon tax	Argument:A cap-and-trade system is vulnerable to companies tricking the system by polluting heavily before the system begins	Argument:A cap-and-trade system would be harder on government budgets
Argument:A carbon tax can be easily adjusted over time to achieve desired emissions results	Argument:A carbon tax can be implemented immediately	Argument:A carbon tax is less popular and harder to achieve politically
Argument:A carbon tax is more economical than regulations	Argument:A carbon tax is more likely to result in the costs being passed on to consumers	Argument:A carbon tax is more predictable and less volatile than a cap-and-trade system
Argument:A carbon tax obligates participation, whereas participating in a cap-and-trade system is largely optional	Argument:A carbon tax provides better incentives for green innovation	Argument:A carbon tax sends a serious and important message about the will to fight global warming
Argument:A carbon tax would add a clear cost to polluting and create a market incentive to pollute less	Argument:A carbon tax would also require complicated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms	Argument:A carbon tax would be more efficient
Argument:A carbon tax would better distribute the costs of carbon emissions	Argument:A carbon tax would create funds to support environmentally-friendly policies	Argument:A carbon tax would damage an economy
Argument:A carbon tax would not damage an economy	Argument:A carbon tax would shock consumers into needed behavioral changes	Argument:A cigarette tax is a socially responsible way to pay for health care
Argument:A citizen has a "right" to guns as a means to self-defense	Argument:A country's trade balance (imports vs. exports) is largely irrelevant	Argument:A graduate tax is the best way to increase access to higher education without massively burdening the government with an open-ended financial commitment
Argument:A nuclear-armed Iran will be more aggressive	Argument:A nuclear-armed Iran will not provoke a Middle East arms race	Argument:A partition plan would reduce the need to protect against opposing groups, reducing the incentive for violence
Argument:A partitioning of Iraq may become the only option in Iraq	Argument:A progressive approach could involve a carbon tax rebate	Argument:A vegetarian diet is healthier for humans
Argument:A woman's rights are not the only rights that need to be respected in abortion	Argument:Abortion forestalls the potential societal contributions of a human being	Argument:Abortion may have a positive or neutral impact on the emotions of the women
Argument:Affirmative Action should not attempt to neutralize unfair advantages via race-considerations, but by social and economic background	Argument:Al-Qaeda and the Taliban terrorist suspects were not state parties to the Geneva Conventions that banned torture, leaving room for their torture	Argument:Alcohol harms adolescents more than adults.
Argument:Allowing gay marriage would reduce pressure on gays to marry straight	Argument:American wages have not been harmed by NAFTA	Argument:An effective cap-and-trade system helps reduce economic costs caused by carbon emissions
Argument:Any sanctions effort against Iran would be scuttled by China and Russia	Argument:Argentina can claim Malvinas and uphold the way of life of inhabitants	Argument:Argument:Registered guns can often be accessed by non-registered individuals
Argument:Burglars often break into houses to steal guns	Argument:By executing criminals society rules out the possibility of rehabilitation and productivity	Argument:By promoting low inflation and stabilizing the economy dollarization lays the foundation for a market based economy to properly function
Argument:By promoting low inflation dollarization increases security of money based assets	Argument:Cannabis damages the mind	Argument:Cap-and-trade is more flexible in the interconnected global economy
Argument:Cap-and-trade system don't ensure local area carbon emissions are reduced	Argument:Cap-and-trade would cause job loss	Argument:Capital punishment costs more than life without parole
Argument:Capital punishment does not alleviate the pain of the victim's family and can actually add to it	Argument:Capital punishment does not deter crime	Argument:Capital punishment has a deterrent effect on criminal activities
Argument:Capital punishment is 100% effective in preventing a murderer from killing again	Argument:Capital punishment is easier on murderers than life imprisonment	Argument:Capital punishment is excercised irregularly and arbitrarily
Argument:Capital punishment is the easy and showy way out for murderers, rather than a fitting punishment	Argument:Capital punishment is void of compassion	Argument:Capitalism is a poor economic model
Argument:Carbon-trading can lead to the disproportionate polluting of poorer areas	Argument:Carbon emissions regulations and standards have proven an effective tool, and can be strengthened if necessary	Argument:Carbon tax market mechanisms would be more effective in reducing carbon emissions
Argument:Carbon tax revenues create a basis for progressive "tax shifting"	Argument:Carbon taxes are more politically neutral toward different energy-producing sectors and companies	Argument:Carbon taxes would not cost consumers any more than a cap-and-trade system
Argument:Carbon trading effectively turns the atmosphere into tradeable property	Argument:Case studies in water privatization failure	Argument:Case studies of the success of water privatization
Argument:Cases in which water privatization is claimed to have improved environmental conditions	Argument:Chapter 11-style provisions allow a business to reorganise	Argument:Children do not need distinct male and female parental role-models
Argument:Children should not be subjects of a gay adoption experiment	Argument:China has consistently maintained that if Taiwan declares independence it will declare war	Argument:Chinese expansion in Tibet is a real threat to the Tibetans
Argument:Chávez has specifically stated his opposition to privatization	Argument:Citizen gun ownership acts as a deterrent against criminals	Argument:Civil marriages don not interfere with a Church's freedom to deny its own marriage services to gays
Argument:Cloning technology is unsafe for the resulting life	Argument:Cluster bombs are usually fired at areas with a virtually nonexistent civilian population	Argument:Cluster bombs are usually used in uninhabited areas
Argument:Communism will destroy the economy	Argument:Companies that out-source cheaper labor aren't investing enough in innovation	Argument:Cooling between 1940 and 1975 can be attributed to sulphate aerosols
Argument:Corn energy has been confirmed by specialists to be energy efficient	Argument:Councils are revenue driven so they pressure officers to hand out many tickets	Argument:Counters to Pimentel's studies concluding that ethanol is a net energy gain
Argument:Creationism is not science	Argument:Creationism is science	Argument:Criminals will find a way to commit crimes and violence with or without guns
Argument:Dalai Lama is the only solution for Tibet	Argument:Danger of arbitrary rulings accompanies hate crime laws	Argument:Deficit spending is economically unhealthy in the long run
Argument:Deficit spending leads to economic stimulation	Argument:Deficit spending strengthens US exports by making them less expensive abroad	Argument:Democracy promotes harmonious and cooperative inter-state relations
Argument:Dollarization can help lower borrowing costs	Argument:Dollarization can increase competition, innovation, productivity	Argument:Dollarization can increase the stability of a country's bank system
Argument:Dollarization increases market access and integration	Argument:Dollarized countries can create a higher demand for American goods and services	Argument:Due process is all that is required, even if it risks wrongful execution
Argument:Due to its relative inefficiency, meat is very expensive	Argument:Economic freedom and stability spur people's demands for a democratic society	Argument:Economists worry about the losses of free trade and globalization
Argument:Efficiency standards are more popular than market approaches	Argument:Emissions markets are more economical than regulations	Argument:Ethanol-blended fuels are approved under the warranties of all auto manufacturers marketing vehicles in the United States
Argument:Ethanol energy does not get good fuel-economy with standard engines	Argument:Ethanol energy incentivizes the clearing of forests and habitats for crop production	Argument:Ethanol energy involves a net energy gain
Argument:Ethanol energy involves a net loss of energy	Argument:Ethanol energy produces a net energy gain	Argument:Ethanol fuel is bad for engines
Argument:Ethanol helps prevent wintertime problems by acting as a gas-line antifreeze	Argument:Ethanol is an economical energy resource	Argument:Even unofficial dollarization increases the stability of a country's bank system
Argument:Examples of police prejudice in the enforcement of the law are rare and don't justify more lax gun-control	Argument:Exoneration from death row is not proof of innocence, but rather the lack of proof of guilt	Argument:Fatal exchanges often occur because an innocent person decides to draw out a gun on an assailant
Argument:Free file-sharing sites often transmit viruses and ad-ware	Argument:Free market economies self-regulate socially, ethically, and morally	Argument:Free markets and free trade are ideal economic conditions
Argument:Free markets and trade benefit the environment	Argument:Free trade's notion of specialization is risky for countries	Argument:Free trade allows for specialization across countries
Argument:Free trade and globalization harms poor and developing countries	Argument:Free trade and markets benefit the environment	Argument:Free trade and markets harm the environment
Argument:Free trade benefits the large multinationals of developed countries	Argument:Free trade benefits the manufacturing sector in developed countries	Argument:Free trade causes job loss in many unskilled industries of developed countries
Argument:Free trade frequently causes trade deficits in developed countries	Argument:Free trade increases the productivity of the manufacturing sector in developed countries	Argument:Free trade increases the purchasing power of workers
Argument:Free trade intrudes on national sovereignty	Argument:Free trade is unpopular	Argument:Free trade promotes democracy
Argument:Free trade promotes peace and stability internationally	Argument:Gangsta rap encourages listeners to criminality	Argument:Gay couples are raising children now, but at a disadvantage without the benefits of marriage
Argument:Gay marriage would be no worse for the "institution of marriage" than a number of other existing harmful legal unions	Argument:Gays strengthen the institution of marriage by showing that want to be a part of it	Argument:Gen. 9.6, "He who sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed", helps justify capital punishment
Argument:Georgia has made many efforts to improve stability	Argument:Global governance is inevitable	Argument:Globalization and free trade has reduced inequality
Argument:Globalization has improved living standards	Argument:Globalization has worsened poverty	Argument:Globalization involves positive imitation of cultures
Argument:Globalization is a "race to the bottom"	Argument:Globalization is not rampant, remaining fairly limited in scope globally	Argument:Globalization promotes materialistic values that undermine wider ethical and social values within each culture
Argument:Government-funded universal health care would violate patient privacy	Argument:Governments within a cap-and-trade system have the incentive to "cheat"	Argument:Gun-control has a history of racist or prejudiced applications
Argument:Gun sports have economic benefits	Argument:Hand-gun restrictions would not put extra strain on individual privacy laws	Argument:Hand-guns are frequently used in crime because they can be concealed
Argument:Hand-guns can be carried on one's person, and thus have a unique and valuable protective capacity	Argument:Having total control over lives through education is unjust	Argument:Health-on-Risk-Not a good idea
Argument:Health care is a basic human right or entitlement	Argument:Health care is not a right	Argument:Health care is not a right nor the responsibility of governments
Argument:Health care would be an illigitimate "positive" right	Argument:Heterosexual couples often "recklessly procreate", whereas homosexual parents always make a conscious choice to have a child	Argument:High inflation and economic instability have historically led to authoritarian regimes
Argument:Homosexual homes are not good for children	Argument:Homosexual parenting is just as good as heterosexual parenting	Argument:Homosexual sexual tension will result from allowing gays in the military, which will undermine troop bonds and performance on the battle field
Argument:Homosexuality would bring the end of the human race	Argument:Homosexuals do not make good parents because they are not "differentiated" role-models	Argument:Hosting the Olympics stimulates regeneration, investment, and long-term economic benefits
Argument:How far can economic liberalisation create democratic progression	Argument:How far can economic liberalisation create democratic progression?	Argument:Hugo Chávez has specifically stated that he supports capitalism
Argument:Human carbon emissions have dramatically increased global temperatures	Argument:Human carbon emissions have dramatically increased the global temperature.	Argument:Humans have dominion over animals
Argument:Hunting is a good way of controlling widlife	Argument:If the dollar is globally depreciating, mass dumping of dollar can occur	Argument:Illegalization of marijuana possesion, trad or distribution keeps it much profitable and lure people to corrupt.
Argument:Images about what continent prevail in gun ownership are erroneous and an general international picture is hard to use evidence	Argument:Implementation of the death penalty can suffer from social or racial bias and prejudice	Argument:In a democracy civil disobedience cannot be justified because sufficient means for change exist
Argument:India and Pakistan's partitioning largely failed	Argument:Infant industries should be protected from free trade	Argument:Iran's continuous violations of IAEA and NPT provisions demonstrate it nefarious intentions
Argument:Iran's continuous violations of IAEA and NPT provisions demonstrate its nefarious intentions	Argument:Iran's testing of high-altitude missiles demonstrates an "imminent" nuclear threat	Argument:Iran is likely to have a nuclear weapon within a number of years
Argument:Iran is seeking nuclear weapons, not simply nuclear energy	Argument:Iran would not use its nuclear weapons as this would provoke an annihilating response by the U.S. and/or Israel	Argument:Iranian possession of nuclear weapons will spark an international arms race
Argument:Iraq's neighbors would oppose a partition plan and possibly seek to intervene militarily	Argument:Is Life A Discretionary Status/Title	Argument:Israel's partitioning largely failed
Argument:Israel’s security wall was found by the ICJ to be a breach of international law in 2004	Argument:It is easier for an energy supplier to understand a carbon tax than a cap-and-trade system	Argument:It is easier to enforce limited gun-controls
Argument:It is easy to catch people with laser pointers, but it's not easy to catch people using them improperly.	Argument:It is the lack of global free trade that is the cause of continued poverty	Argument:Judges severely punish criminals if they reject plea bargain deals
Argument:Laser pointers have the ability to bring down aircraft and cause major accidents.	Argument:Lax gun control laws are economically costly	Argument:Legislative processes are ineffectual in making trade agreements
Argument:Life At Concept With Dictionary	Argument:Life imprisonment without parole is better than capital punishment because it allows for a prisoner to develop remorse, repent, and seek forgiveness	Argument:Life without parole is not "more compassionate" than capital punishment
Argument:Life without parole protects society from repeat murders just as well as capital punishment	Argument:Low homicide and crime rates are not a direct cause of low gun ownership	Argument:Machine guns are too capable of inflicting massive casualties
Argument:Many faith groups welcome gay marriage	Argument:Many vaccines have serious and sometimes deadly side effects	Argument:Mexican leaders have cited NAFTA's benefits
Argument:Military success in Darfur is doubtful	Argument:Minimal government intervention in the markets is best	Argument:Modern engines have been made ethanol-compatible
Argument:Most people only write reliable facts when editing wikis	Argument:Multilingual labeling broadens product appeal	Argument:NAFTA's existence encourages free trade globally
Argument:NAFTA and other FTAs make multilateral free trade agreements more difficult to construct	Argument:NAFTA brought in a flood of foreign investment for Mexico	Argument:NAFTA creates the problem of multilingual labeling on goods and products
Argument:NAFTA has benefited the Mexican economy	Argument:NAFTA has harmed Mexican jobs	Argument:NAFTA has improved the GDP of the United States
Argument:NAFTA has increased the number of American jobs	Argument:NAFTA has increased trade significantly with accompanying benefits	Argument:NAFTA has made Mexico more democratic in both the corporate and public worlds
Argument:NAFTA is bad for the environment	Argument:NAFTA is good for the environment	Argument:NAFTA threatens health food safety standards
Argument:NAFTA undermines national sovereignty and control of interests	Argument:NATO already has close links with Croatia	Argument:NATO already has close links with Israel
Argument:NATO expansion is being blamed for Russia's problems	Argument:NATO should intervene militarily in Darfur	Argument:NCLB has succeeded in improving test scores
Argument:NCLB has too narrow a curriculum	Argument:NCLB provides parents with all the information and tools they need to become active in their child's education	Argument:Net Neutrality is a solution in search of a problem
Argument:No-Child-Left-Behind detracts from the education of the gifted	Argument:Online file-sharing allows for more diversity and choice for users	Argument:People should be able to own what they wish
Argument:Proportional justice risks leading to extreme forms of punishment such as torture to make sure they fit the crime	Argument:Proportional representation and coalition governments are weaker	Argument:Protectionism is a nationalistic and selfish world-view
Argument:Protectionism is a poor way to promote infant industries	Argument:Public schooling ruins childhood	Argument:Race is not a significant factor in capital punishment cases
Argument:Relying on the death penalty as a deterrent distracts us from solving the underlying causes of violence and crime	Argument:Retraining workers that lose from free trade is costly	Argument:Revenue from a carbon tax can be used to fund global aid programs
Argument:Russians are feeling betrayed by the expansion of NATO	Argument:Self-defense with a gun is rare	Argument:Serbia's restrictions on extremists were not preventing democracy
Argument:Serbia was not a true democracy	Argument:Slobodan Milosevic, the leader of Serbia, won several elections.	Argument:Studies finding no negative economic effect from file-sharing
Argument:The Carbon trade will worsen existing global inequalities among nations	Argument:The EU Emissions Trading System is a success	Argument:The EU cap-and-trade system is new and its difficulties simply need time to be worked out
Argument:The Kurds are strongly in favor of "federalism" and a partitioning of Iraq	Argument:The Libertarian view point is not right wing	Argument:The US deficit is not bad when properly compared US GDP growth
Argument:The White House is strongly opposed to partitioning Iraq	Argument:The benefits of trade are worth the risks	Argument:The case for "negative" and against "positive" rights
Argument:The commandment "Thou shall not kill" should be interpreted as "thou shall not murder", leaving room for capital punishment as a form of justice	Argument:The consensus among economists is that a carbon tax is the better approach	Argument:The country's restrictions on extremists were not preventing democracy
Argument:The current regional FTAs undermine poor countries' bargaining power	Argument:The current regional free trade agreements lead to the formation of large trading blocks and harm the ability of small countries to engage in free trade	Argument:The death penalty is a proportional due desert for murder
Argument:The death penalty is a proportional punishment for murder	Argument:The death penalty is proportional punishment/due desert for murder	Argument:The government ensures that many services are universally provided, why not healthcare?
Argument:The higher costs of capital punishment are irrelevant given the importance of the issue	Argument:The international risks of a nuclear-armed Iran will significantly raise oil prices	Argument:The partitioning of Iraq would benefit counter-terrorism efforts there
Argument:The partitioning of Iraq would comply with Iraq's constitution	Argument:The risk of executing an innocent person is too high to justify capital punishment	Argument:The sexuality of parents has no effects on a child's future life
Argument:The slow implementation of a cap-and-trade system may make it unpopular over time	Argument:The state should not impose a religious choice	Argument:The surrender freed Japanese people from a dictator
Argument:The transparency and clarity of a carbon tax is attractive politically	Argument:The violence in Darfur could be considered Genocide	Argument:The violence in Darfur is "genocide"
Argument:There is not an unlimited "right to bear arms" in US law	Argument:There is not enough international political support for military intervention in Darfur	Argument:Turkey is not a European country
Argument:US debt growth is not bad when properly compared US GDP growth	Argument:Ukraine already has a close link with NATO	Argument:Universal health care lowers long-term health costs
Argument:Universal health care would be an illegitimate "positive" right	Argument:Universal health care would be an illigitimate "positive" right	Argument:Universal health care would be simpler and easier to understand for patients
Argument:Violence and sex shown on television results in higher rate of crime	Argument:When citizens carry concealed weapons, criminals fear the risks of committing crimes and are deterred	Argument:When the public demands capital punishment it must be executed to maintain a sense of justice being served
Argument:Wikis cannot possibly be 100% reliable if anyone can edit them.	Argument:Year round schools are financially effectinve as they distribute resources throughout the year	Argument:Yields from organic farming can be as high as from industrial-chemical agriculture.
Argument: "An eye for an eye makes the whole world blind"	Argument: "Arms" falling under 2nd Amendment can be regulated but not banned	Argument: "Arms" falling under the 2nd Amendment can be regulated but not banned
Argument: "Arms" in the US 2nd Amendment does not exclude personal "arms"	Argument: "Bear arms" means a military/militia, not individual right	Argument: "Brain drain" in developing countries is a cost of international openness to foreign students
Argument: "Brain drain" in developing countries is cost of international openness to foreign students	Argument: "Brain drain" is a cost of international openness to foreign students	Argument: "Choice" to wear burqa is driven by oppressive ideology
Argument: "Clean coal" can dramatically cut greenhouse gas emissions	Argument: "Clean coal" costs are necessary energy investment	Argument: "Clean coal" distracts from better, cleaner alternatives
Argument: "Clean coal" is too expensive to significantly cut emissions	Argument: "Clean coal" processing uses fossil fuels	Argument: "Clean coal" still releases radioactive materials
Argument: "Clean coal" will come too late to help fight global warming	Argument: "Continuation plays" can of course be exempt from instant replay	Argument: "Dominion" makes humans stewards; no right to harm/exploit animals
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" costs military gay recruits	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" costs the military needed soldiers	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" damages gay troop relationships
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" does not actively pursue gays	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" forbids homosexual acts, not gays	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" fosters discrimination against women
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" has been upheld in court	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" has been very costly in dollars	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" insults and traumatizes gay troops
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" invites hearsay accusations	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" is exploited by troops to avoid combat	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" is inconsistent with conservative ideals
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" is not harming recruiting	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" maintains modest sexual values	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" makes gays second class citizens
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" preserves US military values	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" punishes citizens coming-out of closet	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" puts commanders in compromising position
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" puts commanders in unfair position	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" softened military policy on gays	Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" undermines troop morale and unit cohesion
Argument: "Don't ask don't tell" was stepping stone to gays in military	Argument: "Don't task don't tell" costs the military good/needed servicemen	Argument: "Don't task don't tell" loses the military good/needed servicemen
Argument: "Enhanced interrogations" are similar to Nazi methods	Argument: "Enhanced interrogations" effectively obtain info, save lives	Argument: "Facebook law" widens gap b/w student lives inside/outside school
Argument: "Frontloading" shifts attention only to the earliest primaries	Argument: "Frontloading" shifts attention only to the earliest primaries and in this disrupting a real participatory democracy	Argument: "God's law" on burqa cannot override secular human rights
Argument: "Good fences make good neighbors"	Argument: "Guns don’t kill people – people kill people"	Argument: "Happy holidays" covers all the holidays of the season
Argument: "Happy holidays" is part of secular war on Christmas	Argument: "He who sheds the blood of man, by man shall his blood be shed" (Gen. 9.6) supports executions	Argument: "Jewish state" intended to preempt any right of return
Argument: "Jurisdiction clause" in 14th applies to children of undocumented	Argument: "Keep" in the 2nd amendment refers to an individual right to bear arms	Argument: "Killing" is not "murder" and can be justified
Argument: "Mandates" do not require all citizens to buy insurance	Argument: "Merry Christmas" doesn't usually offend non-Christians	Argument: "Merry Christmas" makes people happier than "happy holidays"
Argument: "Merry Christmas" should be taken in good spirit	Argument: "Merry Christmas only" camp is over zealous	Argument: "Middle Way" in Tibet adopts Buddhist "Middle Way" (non-extremism)
Argument: "Middle way" wisely supports the Chinese Olympic Games	Argument: "New" Serbia wants to move away from Kosovo problem	Argument: "Obligations"/"equality" distract from solving climate change
Argument: "Official English" does not mean "English only"	Argument: "One child" causes abortion of daughters, demographic shift	Argument: "One child" changed tradition that more children is better
Argument: "One child" exacerbates China's aging population problem	Argument: "One child" generally improves living standards of Chinese	Argument: "One child" increases GDP per capita, improves living standards
Argument: "One child" increases GDP per capita, living standards	Argument: "One child" is only partly responsible for reducing China's fertility rates	Argument: "One child" liberates female productivity, improves gender equality
Argument: "One child" policy helps fight against global warming	Argument: "One child" policy undermines family support networks	Argument: "One child" will create a generation of men without women to marry
Argument: "Party bosses" are legally permitted to exercise power in primaries	Argument: "Party bosses" are legally permitted to exercising power in primaries	Argument: "Passion" for hunting is due to callousness
Argument: "Preconditions" for talking are often what need to be talked about	Argument: "Proof" of anthropogenic global warming is an impossible standard in theory-based science	Argument: "Proof" of climate change is an impossible standard in science
Argument: "Qualified" foreign students are inherently not national security threats	Argument: "Qualified" foreign students are not national security threats	Argument: "Qualified majority voting" prevents obstruction by a small EU minority
Argument: "Random" breath tests likely to be implemented unequally	Argument: "Reasonable suspicion" in Arizona will lead to racial profiling	Argument: "Reasonable suspicion" too high standard for detecting drunk drivers
Argument: "Recycling" nuclear waste is not a viable environmental solution	Argument: "Smart mines" address most arguments against landmines	Argument: "Smart mines" almost never fail to self-destruct
Argument: "Smart mines" become harmless after hostilities cease	Argument: "Smart mines" can't differentiating between civilians and soldiers	Argument: "Spilling seed" is not what God found wicked about Onan's acts
Argument: "Step-up" eliminates capital gains tax from estate tax	Argument: "Success" in Iraq impossible; withdrawal should come sooner than later	Argument: "Success" in Iraq is impossible so withdrawal should come sooner than later
Argument: "Summer learning loss" harms poor students most	Argument: "Surge" in Afghanistan is costly to other US programs	Argument: "Surge" in Afghanistan is necessary to Pakistan's future
Argument: "Surge" in Afghanistan is vital to fight on terror	Argument: "Surge" in Afghanistan will fail as Russians failed	Argument: "Surge" in Afghanistan wrongly escalates the conflict
Argument: "Surge" provides necessary troops to secure Afghanistan	Argument: "The people" should not be conflated to include only a collective right	Argument: "Thou shall not kill" means "thou shall not murder"
Argument: "Thou shall not kill" means "thou shall not murder"; executions okay	Argument: "Under God" acknowledges religion is essential to government	Argument: "Under God" affirms individual rights as divine and inalienable
Argument: "Under God" affirms the religious heritage of America	Argument: "Under God" alienates atheists and nontheists	Argument: "Under God" complies with separation of Church and State
Argument: "Under God" does not mandate or coerce religious belief	Argument: "Under God" endorses faith; violates separation of Church and State	Argument: "Under God" in the Pledge of Allegiance trivializes God
Argument: "Under God" is a cultural/patriotic, not religious, pledge	Argument: "Under God" is a humbling expression of American faith	Argument: "Under God" is an uplifting expression of faith
Argument: "Under God" is cultural; no coercion of Children involved	Argument: "Under God" is neutral between faiths	Argument: "Under God" is not a passive cultural expression; it's prayer
Argument: "Under God" is simply unnecessary in a patriotic pledge	Argument: "Under God" must be legally read in a way insulting to faith	Argument: "Under God" teaches children they must be faithful to be patriotic
Argument: "Under God" too ingrained in US culture to get rid of it	Argument: "Under God" violates the separation of Church and State	Argument: "Under God" was rashly added to patriotic Pledge in 1954
Argument: "Under God" wrongly coerces Children to believe in God	Argument: "Under God" wrongly mixes allegiances to country and God	Argument: "Under god" is unconstitutional even if majority want it
Argument: "Uniting for Peace" Resolutions to bypass UN vetoes are only symbolic	Argument: "Unwanted" children can be adopted; abortion is unnecessary	Argument: "Virtual fences" have had poor historical results
Argument: "Washing" tar from sands forms highly polluted ponds	Argument: $165 million AIG bonuses is not chump change	Argument: $700 billion bailout plan is too little too late
Argument: $700b bailout could go toward excessive pay of greedy CEOs	Argument: $700b bailout gives Treasury blank check	Argument: $700b bailout helps avoid widespread bankruptcies/layoffs
Argument: $700b bailout includes oversight/transparency	Argument: $700b bailout is consistent with US government interventionism	Argument: $700b bailout is generally well designed to solve US economic crisis
Argument: $700b bailout is generally well designed to solve the crisis	Argument: $700b bailout is important to stabilize volatile global markets	Argument: $700b bailout is slippery slope to socialism
Argument: $700b bailout is unjustified over majority taxpayer opposition	Argument: $700b bailout must be implemented immediately to avoid crisis	Argument: $700b bailout offers buyer for frozen mortgages; restores liquidity
Argument: $700b bailout saves Wallstreet by slamming taxpayers	Argument: $700b bailout would increase US deficit and interest rates	Argument: $700b bailout wrongly trusts culprits to solve crisis
Argument: $700b plan and intervention in markets worsens problems	Argument: $700b plan bails-out risk-takers who need to learn lesson	Argument: $700b plan gives unconstitutionally broad power to Treasury
Argument: $700b plan has been corruptly influenced by Wallstreet	Argument: $700b plan is better for economy/taxpayers than doing nothing	Argument: $700b plan is very unfortunate, but is a necessary evil
Argument: $700b plan may result in few losses or actually profit taxpayers	Argument: $700b plan saves economy and taxpayers, not just Wallstreet	Argument: $700b plan would bail-out greedy capitalists that created crisis
Argument: 0-emission hydrogen cars can slash emissions, fight global warming	Argument: 0-emission renewables are a superior alternative to natural gas	Argument: 0-emissions vehicles are a superior option to natural gas vehicles
Argument: 0-emissions vehicles superior to natural gas ones	Argument: 14th Amendment permits denying voting rights to criminals	Argument: 14th amendment has great legacy; don't change it to end birthright
Argument: 14th amendment need not be amended, just reinterpreted	Argument: 14th amendment was written at a different time, but still applies	Argument: 15%-by-2021 RES is insufficient to liberals
Argument: 18-and-over law enables teaching of responsible drinking	Argument: 18-year-olds are trusted with many things; why not drinking?	Argument: 18-year drinking age makes college regulation easier
Argument: 18 drinking age would help fight fake IDs and terrorism	Argument: 18 year-olds are mentally/physically mature enough to drink	Argument: 18 year-olds are trusted in war; they should be trusted to drink
Argument: 1947 Arab invasion invalidated "international" status of Jerusalem	Argument: 1996 Helms-Burton bill justly followed Cuba shooting down two civilian airplanes	Argument: 1996 sanctions justly followed Cuba shooting down 2 US civilian airplanes
Argument: 1997 Anti-Personnel Landmines Treaty should not be interpreted to include cluster bombs	Argument: 1st and 2nd clauses of 2nd amendment guarantee militia and individual gun rights	Argument: 2001 IPCC report concludes humans causing climate change
Argument: 2005 US Strategic Bombing Survey said bombing Japan unnecessary	Argument: 2006 S. Ossetia referendum only exacerbated tensions	Argument: 2008 Tibetan rioters attacked Han Chinese individuals and their property
Argument: 2009 US health bill would do more harm than good	Argument: 2009 US health care bill does not cut costs	Argument: 2009 US health care reform is historic improvement
Argument: 2009 US stimulus accommodates Republican tax-cutting views	Argument: 2009 US stimulus can be paid for by more progressive taxes	Argument: 2009 US stimulus has too much pork and wasteful spending
Argument: 2009 US stimulus lacks short-term spending for immediate stimulus	Argument: 2009 US stimulus needs to be effective, not bipartisan	Argument: 2009 US stimulus package has too much pork
Argument: 2009 US stimulus risks being too small not too large	Argument: 2009 US stimulus will create or save millions of jobs	Argument: 2009 US stimulus won't generate consumer confidence
Argument: 2009 bill does not fundamentally reform health care	Argument: 2009 health bill forces buying from private insurers	Argument: 2009 health bill is much better than nothing
Argument: 2009 health bill is political symbolism, not substance	Argument: 2009 health bill rushed through for political reasons	Argument: 2009 health care reform bill can be improved over time
Argument: 2009 health care reform bill would lower premiums	Argument: 2009 health care reform would cut deficits	Argument: 2009 surge essential to future of Afghanistan
Argument: 2010 US bank tax will kill jobs created/fostered by banks	Argument: 2010 US elections show why transparent campaign ads needed	Argument: 2010 US financial reform ends "too big to fail"
Argument: 2010 bailout is a matter of EU solidarity	Argument: 2010 bank tax is pure populism	Argument: 2010 bank tax puts US banks at disadvantage globally
Argument: 2010 bank tax will deter future risk-taking by banks	Argument: 2010 bank tax will raise less revenue due to evasion	Argument: 2010 banking reform perpetuates "too big to fail" policies
Argument: 2010 financial reform exposes sensitive information	Argument: 2010 financial reform increases transparency	Argument: 2010 financial reform offers important consumer protection
Argument: 2010 financial regs can't end "too big to fail" and bailouts	Argument: 2010 reform expands "shock-absorbers" for next financial crisis	Argument: 2010 reforms enable orderly dismantling of failing banks
Argument: 2010 reforms limit size of banks and risks failures	Argument: 21-law causes kids to avoid getting caught over seeking help	Argument: 21-law causes kids to not seek help out of fear of punishment
Argument: 21 drinking-age creates class of law-breakers; trivializes law	Argument: 21 drinking-age general lowers under-age drinking	Argument: 21 drinking-age has not reduced under-age drinking
Argument: 21 drinking-age just transfers deaths to 21-24 age group	Argument: 21 drinking-age may not be responsible for lower driving deaths	Argument: 21 drinking-age punishes parents who supervise drinking
Argument: 21 drinking-age undermines colleges shaping responsible drinkers	Argument: 21 drinking age usurps parental role on responsible drinking	Argument: 21 law causes reckless/unsupervised under-age drinking
Argument: 2nd Amendment applies only to collective right of militia to bear arms	Argument: 2nd Amendment conferred a right to defend against various historical threats	Argument: 2nd Amendment conferred an individual right to defend against various historical threats
Argument: 2nd Amendment conferred individual right to defend against various threats	Argument: 2nd Amendment only protects right to arms in context of militia	Argument: 2nd Amendment rights did not extend to all ethnic groups
Argument: 2nd Amendment rights did not extend to all ethnic groups in terms of initial practice	Argument: 2nd amendment cannot offer a right to form a militia	Argument: 2nd amendment cannot offer a right to form a militia when Congress can disarm it
Argument: 2nd amendment cannot offer a right to form a militia when Congress can disarm one	Argument: 2nd amendment combines right to militia and individual arms	Argument: 2nd amendment could not exist solely to uphold militias as Congress has power to disarm them
Argument: 2nd amendment could not offer a right to form a militia as Congress can disarm one	Argument: 2nd amendment guarantees both militia and individual arms rights	Argument: 2nd atomic bomb on Nagasaki was necessary in achieving surrender
Argument: 4-team college football playoffs open slippery slope to bigger playoffs	Argument: 4-team playoff inevitably leads to bigger playoffs	Argument: 4-team playoff is good way to determine champs
Argument: 5th amendment of US Constitution allows for executions	Argument: 700 mile fence damages diplomacy and intelligence sharing	Argument: 700 mile fence will help secure southern US border against threats
Argument: 9-month schooling crams too much info into shorter period	Argument: 9/11 Commission didn't recommend building a border barrier	Argument: 9/11 highlights need for religious tolerance for ground zero mosque
Argument: 9/11 suspects can be convicted without classified evidence	Argument: 9/11 was a one-off incident	Argument: 99% of South Ossetians voted for independence in 2006
Argument: AIG and free markets cannot be relied upon	Argument: AIG bailout benefited banks; bank tax justified	Argument: AIG bonus contracts, like all contracts, are subject to change
Argument: AIG bonus contracts are invalidated by taxpayer bailout	Argument: AIG bonuses are an insult to suffering taxpayers	Argument: AIG bonuses are insignificant relative to larger problems
Argument: AIG bonuses blackmail taxpayers with threat of collapse	Argument: AIG bonuses make case for bank nationalization	Argument: AIG bonuses represent company's greed
Argument: AIG bonuses reward those responsible for collapse	Argument: AIG bonuses stimulate New York and national economy	Argument: AIG bonuses would not have been possible without bailout
Argument: AIG contracts no different than invalidated auto contracts	Argument: AIG did not file for bankruptcy; bonus contracts still valid	Argument: AIG employees are not only ones capable of restructuring
Argument: AIG employees fulfilled terms of bonus contracts	Argument: AIG employees turned down jobs on basis of bonus contracts	Argument: AIG gave bonuses under contract with employees
Argument: AIG is obligated by contract with employees to give bonuses	Argument: AIG knows best how to spend bailout (even on bonuses)	Argument: AIG should reveal contracts so public can judge validity
Argument: AIG was bailed out by taxpayers; bonuses are wrong	Argument: AIG workers/execs that caused collapse won't help recovery	Argument: ANWR drilling is opposed by the majority of tribes in Alaska
Argument: ANWR drilling would harm polar bears	Argument: ANWR drilling would result in many "trickle-down" economic benefits	Argument: ANWR has substantial oil reserves and is an important resource to tap
Argument: ANWR oil drilling will lead to the exploitation of other protected areas	Argument: ANWR oil drilling would harm ANWR caribou	Argument: ANWR oil drilling would require environmentally damaging infrastructure
Argument: A "crowned republic" in Australia is not an adequate republic	Argument: A "soft" partitioning of Iraq would reduce sectarian violence in Iraq	Argument: A 16-team college football playoff would be best
Argument: A 1986 Chernobyl accident would not occur today	Argument: A 2008 US stimulus package threatens to worsen inflation	Argument: A 2008 mail-in re-vote in Michigan/Florida would be democratically inclusive
Argument: A 2008 mail-in re-vote in Michigan and Florida would be democratically inclusive	Argument: A 21 drinking age drives a wedge into social groups	Argument: A 700-mile fence is only the first step in securing the whole southern border
Argument: A 700-mile fence will reduce long-term border security costs	Argument: A 700 mile fence is like the Berlin Wall	Argument: A 700 mile fence will help secure the southern US border against a number of threats
Argument: A DC handgun ban is a reasonable measure against high gun violence	Argument: A DC handgun ban is justified in comatting very high gun violence	Argument: A European missile defense system threatens and antagonizes Russia
Argument: A Florida and Michigan re-vote could help decide the Democratic nomination	Argument: A J.D. opens opportunities in political/govt work	Argument: A Kangaroo culling would humanely prevent a population crash
Argument: A Moonbase will help instruct establishing a base on Mars	Argument: A Muslim head scarf ban is important to preserving state secularism	Argument: A Palestinian state would be dysfunctional
Argument: A US early exit would legitimize the Iraqi government and avoid civil war	Argument: A US withdrawal might embolden Jihadists, but they are insignificant in Iraq	Argument: A Western intervention in Darfur would result in a jihadist insurgency there
Argument: A ban on assault weapons is not a slippery slope to an all gun ban	Argument: A ban on legal handguns disadvantages citizens against armed criminals	Argument: A ban violates the rights of women who freely choose to wear veils
Argument: A binding nuclear ban treaty could work	Argument: A border fence will divide border communities	Argument: A border fence would be harmful to US-Latin American Diplomacy
Argument: A border fence would bisect natural habitats and migrations	Argument: A border fence would create an incentive for illegal immigrants to remain inside a country	Argument: A border fence would not be as effective as other measures
Argument: A border wall will cut-off farmers and water supplies	Argument: A boycott of the 2008 Olympics would antagonize the Chinese people	Argument: A cap-and-trade creates arbitrary base-lines
Argument: A cap-and-trade schemes cause job loss	Argument: A cap-and-trade system better encourages companies to cut their carbon emissions	Argument: A cap-and-trade system incentivizes reductions in carbon emissions where it can be done most efficiently
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is "progressive"	Argument: A cap-and-trade system is certain to reduce emissions, which is important in context of the global warming crisis	Argument: A cap-and-trade system is more susceptible to corruption than a carbon tax
Argument: A cap-and-trade system is susceptible to distortion by lobby groups	Argument: A cap-and-trade system would be harder on government budgets	Argument: A carbon tax addresses carbon emissions in all industries
Argument: A carbon tax adds a clear cost to pollution that incentivizes reductions	Argument: A carbon tax can be adjusted to achieve desired emissions reductions	Argument: A carbon tax can be easily adjusted over time to achieve desired emissions results
Argument: A carbon tax can be implemented immediately	Argument: A carbon tax fairly treats all carbon emissions as "bad"	Argument: A carbon tax helps reduce emissions in all industries
Argument: A carbon tax helps symbolize political will to fight global warming	Argument: A carbon tax is a tax, so is more difficult politically	Argument: A carbon tax is less popular and harder to achieve politically
Argument: A carbon tax is less volatile than a cap-and-trade system	Argument: A carbon tax is more economical	Argument: A carbon tax is more economical than regulations
Argument: A carbon tax is more likely to result in the costs being passed on to consumers	Argument: A carbon tax is more predictable and less volatile than a cap-and-trade system	Argument: A carbon tax is more predictable than a cap-and-trade
Argument: A carbon tax market mechanisms would be more effective in reducing carbon emissions	Argument: A carbon tax obligates participation	Argument: A carbon tax obligates participation, whereas participating in a cap-and-trade system is largely optional
Argument: A carbon tax passes costs on to consumers	Argument: A carbon tax passes costs onto consumers	Argument: A carbon tax provides better incentives for green innovation
Argument: A carbon tax provides superior incentives for green innovation	Argument: A carbon tax requires substantial government monitoring	Argument: A carbon tax sends a serious and important message about the will to fight global warming
Argument: A carbon tax shocks consumers into making needed behavioral changes	Argument: A carbon tax will cost all taxpayers, not just polluters	Argument: A carbon tax would add a clear cost to polluting and create a market incentive to pollute less
Argument: A carbon tax would also require complicated monitoring and enforcement mechanisms	Argument: A carbon tax would be more efficient	Argument: A carbon tax would better distribute the costs of carbon emissions
Argument: A carbon tax would create funds to support environmentally-friendly policies	Argument: A carbon tax would damage an economy	Argument: A carbon tax would not damage an economy
Argument: A carbon tax would shock consumers into needed behavioral changes	Argument: A cigarette tax is a socially responsible way to pay for health care	Argument: A circumcised penis looks better
Argument: A citizen has a "right" to guns as a means to self-defense	Argument: A civil war in Iraq would draw in regional powers	Argument: A civil war would disrupt Iraq's oil revenues
Argument: A clear majority of Alaskans support drilling in ANWR	Argument: A clear majority of Americans oppose drilling in ANWR	Argument: A cloned human would have a diminished sense of identity
Argument: A cloned human would have a diminished sense of identity/individuality	Argument: A cluster bomb ban is worthless with so many non-signatories	Argument: A cluster bomb ban will undermine military alliances
Argument: A cluster bomb ban would jeopardize joint peacekeeping operations	Argument: A combination of weapons can substitute for landmines	Argument: A comprehensive US energy plan must include offshore drilling
Argument: A constitutional right to bear arms is not subject to reasonableness standards	Argument: A country's trade balance (imports vs. exports) is largely irrelevant	Argument: A drawn-out culture war over gay marriage would be socially damaging
Argument: A fat tax is just as appropriate as cigarette and alcohol taxes	Argument: A fat tax will correct a market failure (fatty foods)	Argument: A fence is justified as a sovereign regulation of cross-border flows
Argument: A fetus cannot have a right to a woman's body to sustain its life	Argument: A fetus cannot have rights over a woman's body	Argument: A fetus is no more a human than an acorn is a tree
Argument: A fetus is uniquely capable of becoming a person; deserves rights	Argument: A fetus will become a full-grown person, but only with a right to life	Argument: A global commons of water resources will help maintain international security
Argument: A global water commons would address the mismanagement of water resources by failed states	Argument: A good solution to the US economic crisis cannot be rushed	Argument: A graduate tax is the best way to increase access to higher education without massively burdening the government with an open-ended financial commitment
Argument: A handgun ban deprives citizens of the most common self-defense weapon	Argument: A handgun ban deprives citizens of the most commonly used weapon for self defense	Argument: A handgun ban is justified in achieving a legitimate government purpose
Argument: A handgun ban is justified in achieving reasonable government aims	Argument: A handgun ban lowers the availability of guns used in domestic passion murders	Argument: A handgun ban serves to weaken US military preparedness
Argument: A head scarf ban can hinder/prevent Muslim women from marrying	Argument: A head scarf ban violates the right to free religious practice	Argument: A head scarf ban violates the right to freedom of religion and expression
Argument: A head scarf ban violates the right to freedom of religious and expression	Argument: A head scarf ban violates the right to freedom of religious expression	Argument: A head scarf ban will disproportionately impact Muslim girls
Argument: A hydrogen economy would require huge government investments	Argument: A large majority of Americans oppose lowering drinking age	Argument: A mail-in ballot funded by private interests risks conflicts of interest
Argument: A mail-in ballot risks disenfranchising poor, more transient voters	Argument: A mail-in ballot system entails risks of voter fraud	Argument: A majority of Americans supported Obama's stimulus
Argument: A majority of dutch disapprove of their country's lax drug policies	Argument: A manned mission to Mars would be too expensive	Argument: A manned mission to Mars would inspire humankind
Argument: A manned mission to Mars would unify humankind	Argument: A manned presence on the Moon is superior to a robotic one	Argument: A master's degree helps you network in chosen career field
Argument: A master's degree increases marketability	Argument: A master's degree is a "must have" for some jobs	Argument: A master's degree is a great life achievement
Argument: A masters degree adds to a person's narrative	Argument: A nation-wide popular vote risks recounts and crises of legitimacy	Argument: A national ID card will make America less secure
Argument: A national champion through a playoff is not important	Argument: A national primary would abandon the healthy caucus process	Argument: A national primary would violate Party rights to association
Argument: A national renewable energy standard will be very expensive	Argument: A national renewable energy standard will increase electricity costs	Argument: A nuclear-armed Iran will not provoke a Middle East arms race
Argument: A nuclear Iran is an existential threat to Israel	Argument: A nuclear Iran is an intolerable threat to global security	Argument: A nuclear Iran is not generally a major security risk
Argument: A nuclear Iran may supply the weapon to terrorists	Argument: A nuclear Iran undermines prospects for democracy there	Argument: A nuclear Iran will be more aggressive toward Israel
Argument: A nuclear Iran will spark an international arms race	Argument: A nuclear Iran would be more aggressive in the Middle East	Argument: A nuclear Iran would be more inclined to support terrorism
Argument: A nuclear Iran would use oil as a weapon	Argument: A nuclear abolition treaty is feasible with worldwide unanimity	Argument: A nuclear disaster would be very costly economically
Argument: A nuclear weapons ban could accompany a chem and bio weapons ban	Argument: A nuclear weapons ban could work with a rigorous inspection system	Argument: A nuclear weapons ban could work with rigorous inspection
Argument: A one-in-a-million probability of the "ticking time bomb" occuring is sufficient to justify allowing torture in this scenario	Argument: A partition plan would reduce the need to protect against opposing groups, reducing the incentive for violence	Argument: A partitioning of Iraq may become the only option in Iraq
Argument: A payroll tax could help fund universal health care	Argument: A physical fence accompanied with border patrollers will be effective	Argument: A playoff would still maintain and co-opt bowls
Argument: A poorly timed economic stimulus can do harm	Argument: A premature US withdrawal would jeopardize world oil supplies	Argument: A profit health care environment results in more frivolous lawsuits
Argument: A progressive approach could involve a carbon tax rebate	Argument: A public insurance plan can spearhead quality improvements	Argument: A pure flat tax would be a major burden on the poor
Argument: A reduced VAT on condoms will reduce teen pregnancy	Argument: A referendum on an Australian republic could cause a constitutional crisis	Argument: A referendum on an Australian republic could cause a constitutional crisis if rejected by states
Argument: A single-payer system will not cause government to intrude in medical decisions	Argument: A small and growing hydrogen infrastructure already exists	Argument: A small list of countries are exporting their university systems and stand to benefit from liberalization
Argument: A space ring would be far too expensive	Argument: A space shield would be far too expensive	Argument: A speedy end to WWII was critical in saving lives
Argument: A state cannot be denied its right to evaluate foreign students	Argument: A state cannot be denied its right to evaluate prospective foreign students	Argument: A state does not jeopardize its secularism by allowing head scarves
Argument: A successful stimulus can be achieved with proper oversight	Argument: A tax rebate is merely wealth re-distribution	Argument: A tax rebate is not a sustained, long-term stimulus
Argument: A terrorist strike on a nuclear facility could be devastating	Argument: A torture warrant allowed in only the "ticking time-bomb" scenario would settle the concerns of a slippery slope to abuse	Argument: A troop withdrawal would lead to a refuge crisis in Iraq and regionally
Argument: A two-state solution is the least bad option	Argument: A two-state solution will not end conflict	Argument: A unilateral US attack inside Pakistan would be strongly opposed by Pakistan
Argument: A vast number of renowned scientific bodies supported the IPCC Third Assessment Report in 2007	Argument: A vegetarian diet is healthier for humans	Argument: A wall doesn't prevent crossings by false papers or visa overstays
Argument: A wall would force crossers to take more deadly routes	Argument: A woman's rights are not the only rights that need to be respected in abortion	Argument: Abandoning "don't ask don't tell" will decrease violence against gays
Argument: Abandoning UN SC veto to constrain the US would be wrong	Argument: Abolishing UN SC veto won't solve broader problems in UN SC	Argument: Abolishing nuclear weapons is part of fulfilling existing obligations
Argument: Abolishing veto would enable more global action in the UN	Argument: Abolition can't uninvent nuclear weapons	Argument: Abortion advocates wrongly value "quality of life" over "sanctity of life"
Argument: Abortion allows women to become better people without a child	Argument: Abortion allows women to have sex comfortably without fear of pregnancy	Argument: Abortion allows women to have sex without fear of pregnancy
Argument: Abortion ban may harm poor, but does not change case against it	Argument: Abortion disproportionately affects the African American community	Argument: Abortion does not negatively affect a woman's sexual functions
Argument: Abortion fails to liberate women as intended	Argument: Abortion fails to liberate women as it is often promised	Argument: Abortion fails to liberate women as often promised
Argument: Abortion forestalls potential societal contributions of a human	Argument: Abortion forestalls the potential societal contributions of a human being	Argument: Abortion generally devalues the dignity we assign to life
Argument: Abortion has a tenuous history of support in the USA	Argument: Abortion has been opposed by important figures throughout history	Argument: Abortion has positive impact on emotions of most women
Argument: Abortion is a descendant of the genocidal eugenics of the past	Argument: Abortion is a form of eugenics and mass murder	Argument: Abortion is important to reducing over-population globally
Argument: Abortion is just when birth control fails (involuntary impregnation)	Argument: Abortion is murder just as infanticide is murder	Argument: Abortion is not a just response to social problems facing the unborn
Argument: Abortion is the woman's choice, not the father's	Argument: Abortion is wrongly sought as an alternative form of birth control	Argument: Abortion just when birth control fails (involuntary impregnation)
Argument: Abortion justified in cases of involuntary impregnation by rape	Argument: Abortion may be immoral, but it is still a woman's right	Argument: Abortion may be immoral, but the state is not meant to enforce all morals
Argument: Abortion may have a positive or neutral impact on the emotions of the women	Argument: Abortion must be justified in cases of impregnation by rape	Argument: Abortion must be justified in cases of involuntary impregnation by rape
Argument: Abortion often leads to regret, depression, mental illness	Argument: Abortion opens the door to the sexual exploitation of women	Argument: Abortion sets precedent of valuing some humans less than others
Argument: Abortion undermines the dignity of life, promotes violence	Argument: Abortion worsens parenting by devaluing the parent-child relationship	Argument: Abortions are mostly sought when birth control fails
Argument: Abortions are very risky and hazardous to the women	Argument: Abortions are very risky and hazardous to women	Argument: Abortions encourage infanticide
Argument: Abortions under "trying circumstances" are exception not rule	Argument: Abortions under "trying circumstances" are the exception not the rule	Argument: Abortions wrongly value a "quality of life" over "sanctity of life"
Argument: Abstinence-only correctly responds to an epidemic of STDs	Argument: Abstinence-only discourages condom-use, increases risks	Argument: Abstinence-only discourages youth sex and risk-taking
Argument: Abstinence-only does not help decrease HIV infection rates	Argument: Abstinence-only effectively reduces rates of teen sex and pregnancy	Argument: Abstinence-only helps avoid emotional damage of sex at youth
Argument: Abstinence-only helps discourage out-of-wedlock pregnancies	Argument: Abstinence-only helps youth avoid emotional damage of sex	Argument: Abstinence-only is not effective at reducing teen pregnancy
Argument: Abstinence-only is not effective at reducing teen sex rates	Argument: Abstinence-only is too expensive for so few results	Argument: Abstinence-only makes it socially acceptable to abstain from sex
Argument: Abstinence-only presumes pregnancy out-of-wedlock is always wrong	Argument: Abstinence-only promotes healthy, fulfilling relationships	Argument: Abstinence-only provides some info on STDs and contraception
Argument: Abstinence-only rightly teaches saving sex for marriage	Argument: Abstinence-only wrongly bashes all non-marital sex	Argument: Abstinence 100% effective against pregnancy/STDs/HIV/AIDS
Argument: Abstinence may be effective, but teens will never follow it	Argument: Abstinence may have value, but only within comprehensive sex-ed	Argument: Abstinence only education is very effective
Argument: Absurdly young kids are being entered into pageants	Argument: Abundant natural gas helps lower energy prices	Argument: Abundant solar energy can replace fossil fuels and slash emissions
Argument: Abundant wind energy can displace fossil fuels and slash emissions	Argument: Abuses do not demonstrate corporal punishment is inherently wrong	Argument: Abuses happen in monogamy too; why alienate polygamy?
Argument: Acceptance of gay marriage should not be imposed on citizens	Argument: Access to driver's licenses will not lead illegal aliens to obtain insurance	Argument: According to Supreme Court, states cannot prohibit gun possession
Argument: According to the Supreme Court states cannot prohibit people's possession of guns	Argument: Accounting for production energy, solar power still slashes emissions	Argument: Actions more important than badges like MBA
Argument: Adaption efforts may release even more greenhouse gases	Argument: Adaption is not as economical as mitigation	Argument: Adaptive charter schools can make necessary changes
Argument: Added health costs from legal marijuana will outweigh new tax revenues	Argument: Added oil supply from ANWR would be a "drop in the bucket"	Argument: Addiction researchers can rely on animals having no prior drug use
Argument: Addiction researchers know that animals have no prior drug use	Argument: Adding to debt/deficit to fight recession is justified	Argument: Admitting Turkey distracts from fully unifying EU
Argument: Admitting Turkey distracts from fully unifying Europe in the EU	Argument: Admitting Turkey distracts from fully unifying Europe into the EU	Argument: Admitting Turkey leads to a slippery slope of non-European admissions
Argument: Admitting Turkey to the EU would cause the Islamisation of Europe	Argument: Admitting Turkey will only distract the EU from organizing itself	Argument: Admitting foreign students in the national interest
Argument: Adolescents are too emotionally immature to be tried as adults	Argument: Adopting the philosophy of animal rights is individual fulfilling	Argument: Adoption is too risky making it a poor alternative to abortion
Argument: Adult courts do not necessarily translate into longer sentences	Argument: Adult incest can occur after family years	Argument: Adult stem cells have certain drawbacks that make embryonic stem cell research greater in potential
Argument: Adults taught incest as children cannot fully consent	Argument: Advanced care improves Americans' chances of surviving cancer	Argument: Adverse salaries can cause prosecutors to push for plea bargains
Argument: Advocates are fear-mongering to ram through $700b plan	Argument: Advocates of co-ops are really aiming for socialized medicine	Argument: Advocates of extending Bush tax cuts created deficit
Argument: Aerial reforestation cuts costs of reforestation	Argument: Affirm action counters systemic exclusion, allows best to rise	Argument: Affirm action justly asks whites to sacrifice for common good
Argument: Affirm action mismatches bad students with difficult classes	Argument: Affirm action wrongly considers race over econ/edu factors	Argument: Affirmative Action should not attempt to neutralize unfair advantages via race-considerations, but by social and economic background
Argument: Affirmative Action shouldn't neutralize unfair advantages by race, but by wealth	Argument: Affirmative Action uses a definition of "diversity" that is too narrow	Argument: Affirmative action achieves justice by compensating groups for past wrongs
Argument: Affirmative action contradicts the notion of meritocracy	Argument: Affirmative action damages ethos of more qualified non-minorities	Argument: Affirmative action does more harm than good to minorities
Argument: Affirmative action helps create diverse learning environment	Argument: Affirmative action is only way to level playing field	Argument: Affirmative action justly compensates groups for past wrongs
Argument: Affirmative action makes race only a small "plus" for candidates	Argument: Affirmative action only deprives whites of unearned opportunities	Argument: Affirmative action wrongly takes from one group to give to another
Argument: Afg. terrorism is best fought by targeted strikes, not "surge"	Argument: Afg "surge" is about ulterior motives, not terrorism	Argument: Afg "surge" kills more civilians, feeds insurgency/terror
Argument: Afg is backward, cannot be salvaged by US	Argument: Afg only one of many possible terrorist safe havens	Argument: Afghan security forces can hardly be trained
Argument: Afghanistan "surge" finally provides sufficient troops	Argument: Afghanistan "surge" upholds idea of collective security	Argument: Afghanistan is more stable and governable than often assumed
Argument: Afghanistan is of little strategic value to US/NATO	Argument: Afghanistan poses greater threat to US than Iraq	Argument: Afghanistan supported troop surge in early 2008
Argument: Afghanistan surge draws troops away from vulnerable Iraq	Argument: Afghanistan troop surge is part of a just war there	Argument: Afghanistan will be Obama's Vietnam
Argument: Afghans support Obama troop surge	Argument: African tariffs and protectionism have been economically harmful	Argument: Age of candidacy of 18 would encourage greater youth participation
Argument: Agile charter schools can quickly respond to meet demand	Argument: Aging countries contain health care costs without difficulty	Argument: Aging rich countries draw more workers from younger, poorer states
Argument: Agreement of 821 is signal of Tibet unification with China	Argument: Agricultural protectionism causes overuse and degradation of land	Argument: Aid to the poor has proven unsuccessful
Argument: Air strikes can destroy Iran's nuclear program	Argument: Air strikes on Iran would be limited to self-defense	Argument: Airplanes better than high-speed trains for long distances
Argument: Airport body-scanners violate cultural sensitivities	Argument: Al Gore's "An Inconvenient Truth" presents a number of scientific errors on Global Warming	Argument: Al Gore's "Inconvenient Truth" presents a number of scientific errors

Retrieved from "http://debatepedia.idebate.org/en/index.php/Special:Allpages"

Personal tools

Views

Search

Navigation

getting started

Other resources

Toolbox

All articles

From Debatepedia