argument argue about share argue how
 
argue for



pros and cons   against

 
Creds and Cruds for
froggerus on 12-6-2009



Kicking the ball only requires thinking about two dimensions, versus the three dimensions involved with slugging a baseball or softball, making the game more enjoyable to the less-athletically inclined.
2 Cred2 Crud


I love pizza, but that doesn't mean I want to eat pizza every day for the rest of my life.
0 Cred3 Crud


Every dollar that goes towards the ridiculous War on Drugs is a dollar out of the taxpayers' pockets that could otherwise be spent on worthwhile programs.
1 Cred2 Crud


I think it's possibly good to make people aware that not everyone agrees with your opinion. It would be nice to know why they crud you though.
4 Cred0 Crud


If artists want to give their music away, they do so on their websites. People do not have the right to just "share" intellectual property without compensation to the artist. And it's a bullshit argument that there are no lost sales because people who listen and like will buy while those who don't would never have bought the album, movie, TV show anyway. If I would never have bought some other product, like say a car, I don't just get to keep the car. So if you stream a song and like it, much like test driving a car, you then have the option to buy it. If someone were somehow able to give you an instant copy of a vehicle, much like sharing an MP3, whether or not you decided you liked it, you still have an automobile that you didn't pay for. And the more that people file share, the less profit there is for the artist, which in turn might take away a lot of incentive for said artist to make him music, craft, etc., and the higher the price of the product for those who purchase legally.
3 Cred1 Crud


Laws that protect people from being harmed by others make sense, but laws that protect people from themselves do not. A person should be allowed to choose, even at his own peril, whether or not to engage in risky behavior. Not wearing a helmet is risky behavior in that in the event of a motorcycle crash the person not wearing his helmet is more likely to be injured. So what? It is not the job of the state to act as a nanny. I wear my helmet for my own safety, not because the state tells me to.
4 Cred1 Crud


"More Americans are imprisoned on drug charges than what Western Europe (with a bigger population) locks up for all offenses. This unprecedented mass incarceration has imposed an emormous burden on US taxpayers. The federal government faces multi-trillion dollar budget deficits and warns of reductions in social services, education, and the environment. The federal anti-drug budget, however, will increase by 4.7% this fiscal year to $12.468 billion dollars. From 1984 to 1996, California built 21 new prisons, and 1 new university. California state government expenditures on prisons increased 30% from 1987 to 1995, while spending on higher education decreased by 18%. This trend is echoed in every state of the nation." - www.efficacy-online.org
2 Cred2 Crud


"If there is no victim, how can there be a crime? Drug prohibition breeds police corruption and abuse, for the temptation to make drug profits in the black market is very strong. Almost every major US city has had innocent citizens accidentally killed by police in pursuit of a drug bust. Under current law -- driven by the Drug War -- police need only "probable cause" before they can seize property of a 'suspected' drug dealer. This has become a major source of funds for law enforcement agencies as the value of property seized has soared into the hundreds of millions of dollars." - www.efficacy-online.org
1 Cred3 Crud


"The vast majority of people who use recreational drugs do not become addicts and do not need treatment. Most convicted criminals have used marijuana, as well as many other substances. There is no truth to the "Gateway Theory", as millions of Americans who admit to smoking pot do not desire harder drugs, and do not have life-ruining habits that began with pot smoking. Research on the efficacy of marijuana use is non-existant in the USA due to a prohibition on research. International research, however, shows that marijuana's medicinal properties are undeniable." - www.efficacy-online.org
2 Cred1 Crud


"The War on Drugs is waged more harshly against the poor and minorities who don't have the resources to fight back. Draconian laws are never applied evenly to all people. African Americans comprise only 12.2% of the population but they make up 38% of those arrested for drug offenses and 59% of those convicted of drug offenses." - www.efficacy-online.org
1 Cred3 Crud


"Our federal prisons literally are packed with non-violent drug offenders who often have no prior criminal record. People charged with simple drug possession quite often serve more time in jail than violent criminals ... and the violent ones are routinely released to make room for the drug offenders." - www.efficacy-online.org
3 Cred2 Crud


Every dollar that goes towards the ridiculous War on Drugs is a dollar out of the taxpayers' pockets that could otherwise be spent on worthwhile programs.
1 Cred2 Crud


The War on Drugs is legislation of morality. People are imprisoned for the purchasing and possession of substances they wish to put into their own bodies. Whether or not it is wise to do so health-wise, people should be allowed to do whatever they wish to themselves, provided it harms no one else.
2 Cred3 Crud


The very question should sound as ridiculous as if you substituted the word 'interracial' for 'same-sex'. And since there seem to be no good secular objections to gay marriage, there should be no opposition from the states.
8 Cred3 Crud


There is no such thing as a "bad" word. Words are just words. The fact that you cannot be offended by a foreign "bad" word because you do not know its meaning shows that the mere utterance the sounds are not the problem. The fact that people use alternate words to mean the same thing, such as "crap" for "shit" or "frak" for "fuck," shows that the meaning of the word is also not the problem. So what other reason could there possibly be to avoid the use of a certain set of letters and phonics arranged in a particular order? The only reason I can think of is that society has arbitrarily deemed certain words as vulgar. I blame the Puritans. I'm an equal opportunity linguist and think that every word should be used when appropriate, including "douche bag."
2 Cred2 Crud

 
         
argue   for
© 2009 13 Guys Named Ed, LLC   •   About   •   Feedback   •   Sitemap
against   argues