Debate - Blog Posts

Three?? Are we not allowed to have permissions??

Okay but seriously, (I think) I know what they meant. But long permission lists AREN'T a bad thing! Most just list basic stuff and guidelines. In fact, having set permissions is helpful...

I judge on how strict it is. If you have a long ass permission list but it's all general 'don't draw hateful stuff', 'you can/can't do gore', 'you're allowed to genderbend' THATS OKAY!!

But if someone is acting like I'm on thin ice for even attempting to draw their oc, I'm iffy....the ice shouldn't be cracking already boo 🙇‍♀️ calm down

Its all about the context!

I'm gonna be real if your permissions/ requirements list has more than 3 sentences I'm not touching your oc

.

I got bored at work and remembered this reblog, I HAD to sketch it

I can’t stand some Arther Lester designs, not because they aren’t good or the drawings are bad, but because they all look like my debate coach. The other day I saw one and had to do a double take because it was literally just my teacher MY WHOLE ASS TEACHER but with a few scars. I fear this fandom is a prison 👹👹👹

Debate is weird. We switch sides everyother round and there is no correct answer. As long as you have better evidence or reasoning, you can win. In my last meet, (it was virtual) the judge for that round had her camera on and I saw a child running around in the background. So, I used most of my last speech leaning heavily on how if the judge chooses the other side's plan of action, our children will die. It worked and I won. The other people on the debate team are now a little bit more scared of me. I don't regret my actions. I hate children.

How I be defending female characters

All these because someone said they don't like Annette Castlevania

Carrots on pizza.

Why I don't side with Nazis

internet meme, I don't side with them even with my flaws. I have so many of that, but I do not side for many reasons.

first they always use words "subversion" and "subtelty"

as if personal choice and ignorance are victim card. I am not subverted, it is my fault personally.

It is feminine ideology, "words" "words" kind of argument, ignoring any reasonable cause.

and also , it is made for SUCKERS. for sacrifical sheep (except they're male - tautological joke). how many of these roman citizens were rich and happy? How many, compared to the oligarchs who have ruled the country through fear and hired mercenaries, who was happier? Absolute power. Will not help me white male, only your full humility is what I want. Otherwise, don't talk to me about it.

I've also seen that study. Apparently, Super-spunk would be the equivalent of a shotgun shot and would blow right through the top of Lois's skull! Definitely don't forget something like that anytime soon

Ok so remember that argument about Top!Clark Vs. Top!Bruce?

Well I’ve been thinking more about it and you know what I’ve come up with?

They both shouldn’t have sex with each other. Like ever.

Here’s my reasoning.

Top!Clark & Bottom!Bruce

Clark could easily break Bruce’s pelvis/jaw/any other limb that is being used by simply forgetting to be careful (which is kind of easy when you’re going at it. Even love making has its moments.)

Bruce is impatient and likes things his way. So if he wants Clark to go harder or faster or deeper, Clark doesn’t want to disappoint. But what Clark does may feel different on both ends. Bruce might feel like Clark is going too hard, too fast, and too deep but to Clark that’s what Bruce asked. And so they would be battling back and forth about what they want and need.

If Clark has to be careful during everything he does, I really doubt he’s enjoying it like he’s suppose to. Imagine wanting to smack dat ass but you don’t get the satisfaction of really hitting it while your partner is complaining you hit too hard even though you didn’t even try?

Again with the different feelings, maybe Clark is going the right speed for Bruce but Clark may be feeling nothing on his side. He has super senses but the feeling he’s suppose to get during sex needs to be higher than what he feels on a daily basis. (Ex: Feeling a soft item might feel amazing to someone who doesn’t have Clark’s powers but to Clark it’s just that feeling)

If Clark can blow away a building without straining a single vein, who says his spunk ain’t gonna do some damage to Bruce if it’s still inside him, even with Latex wrapped around?

Top!Bruce & Bottom!Clark

Bruce isn’t as strong or as fast so his 100% may feel like his 25% to Clark. Having super senses doesn’t mean everything is super sensed. It just means you feel things differently. He really needs something to jar him to feel that full effect of sex.

doES HE HAVE A PROSTATE?! WHAT SAYS HE EVEN HAS THE SAME HUMAN MALE REPRODUCTIVE SYSTEM AND EROTIC ZONES!??!

Super butt meets Human dick. That shit gonna get broken into two or get squeezed off.

Clark’s sex drive might be far beyond Bruce’s. Bruce might not be able to satisfy Clark the way he should without knowing it.

What if Clark is riding Bruce? And Clark slams a little too hard?? And Bruce is in agony over his dick but Clark doesn’t realize it because he’s in dick heaven???

Conclusion

They shouldn’t fuck each other but should find other ways of pleasuring each other that doesn’t include penetration.

Here’s some other activities they could do!

Really detailed massages

Oral

Lots and lots of kissing and mouthing

Dirty Talking

Dry humping (Intense cuddling)

Really detailed care (This is more of a kink than anything but I find it hot)

Near by masturbation

These two really shouldn’t fuck. Like ever. Too dangerous and not satisfy.

THATS WHAT IM SAYING 😭😭💀

I strongly disagree with this. 

Your first argument “The prisoners in Arkham need somebody like Bolton to keep them in line. Lyle does that, extremely well.” ‘The Prisoners’, the people held within Arkham Asylum are mental patients, they are mentally ill. Harley Quinn has HPD (histrionic personality disorder) and was stuck in an extremely abusive relationship leading to her life of crime, Arnold Wesker has DID (dissociative identity disorder) and doesn’t believe that he committed the crimes but the puppet on his hand. Jonathan Crane has ASPD (as well as other personality disorders), however, in the Btas, it is quite clear he is a very disturbed individual.  

Your second argument “Just because he jerked them around a little, doesn’t mean he’s some hellian. Also, that kind of treatment improves behavior.” Perhaps you may have not noticed because the BTAS is a kids show from the 90s but it is heavily implied that Bolton abuses the patients of Arkham, this has been shown in other media in recent years. To suggest that “jerking patients around (…) improves behaviour.” Is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. It doesn’t work in real life, why would it work in Batman? The Batman universe (ignoring all the supernatural stuff, we’re just talking about Batman n Gotham) reflects real life, corruption, mental illness and (yada yada)  

Your third statement “I don’t agree with how he was kidnapping pretty random people though, like a news reporter, Commissioner Gordon, etc…. If he hadn’t done so he'd be innocent in my eyes.” Obviously, you watched the show with your eyes closed, Lyle Bolton, was a character supposed to represent a republican extremist. You can tell by his room and by his use of the wording “liberal media”. Him kidnapping “random” people is him trying to control the city of Gotham to become what he thinks will be better.  

And…Commissioner Gordon…a random person?? HE’S THE POLICE COMMISSIONER!!!

Fourth statement “I also don’t understand the hate for him. The other Batman villains have done way worse. At least Lyle does something beneficial for Gothams society”  Again, the reason for his hate is because he abuses the patients of Arkham Asylum and other fans of the series actually have empathy. I think the crimes of Lyle Bolton vs The Rogues Gallery can be debated but someone else can do that. The entirety of Gotham Society is corrupted, That's why it’s the most crime filled place on earth. yknow what would make it better? An abusive head of security, so he can make the mentally ill patients even more mentally ill, so they can break out and reek havoc on the good people of Gotham.  

Fifth statement “I don’t understand why Bruce wouldn’t buy a better security system for Arkham in the first place. Bolton knows what he’s doing sooo” That's why Bolton got the job in the first place, because of his record but Bruce fired him because he mistreated mentally ill people. Arkham, while also holding mentally ill people holds geniuses, I find it difficult to believe that, let’s say The Riddler, a self-proclaimed genius would have a difficult time with a new “high tech” security in Arkham, the reason it was a wasn't a "revolving door" was because of the abuse. I personally, don’t think the entire problem with Arkham is the security but the doctors, funding, and the system itself.

I strongly disagree with this. 

Your first argument “The prisoners in Arkham need somebody like Bolton to keep them in line. Lyle does that, extremely well.” ‘The Prisoners’, the people held within Arkham Asylum are mental patients, they are mentally ill. Harley Quinn has HPD (histrionic personality disorder) and was stuck in an extremely abusive relationship leading to her life of crime, Arnold Wesker has DID (dissociative identity disorder) and doesn’t believe that he committed the crimes but the puppet on his hand. Jonathan Crane has ASPD (as well as other personality disorders), however, in the Btas, it is quite clear he is a very disturbed individual.  

Your second argument “Just because he jerked them around a little, doesn’t mean he’s some hellian. Also, that kind of treatment improves behavior.” Perhaps you may have not noticed because the BTAS is a kids show from the 90s but it is heavily implied that Bolton abuses the patients of Arkham, this has been shown in other media in recent years. To suggest that “jerking patients around (…) improves behaviour.” Is the stupidest thing I’ve ever heard. It doesn’t work in real life, why would it work in Batman? The Batman universe (ignoring all the supernatural stuff, we’re just talking about Batman n Gotham) reflects real life, corruption, mental illness and (yada yada)  

Your third statement “I don’t agree with how he was kidnapping pretty random people though, like a news reporter, Commissioner Gordon, etc…. If he hadn’t done so he'd be innocent in my eyes.” Obviously, you watched the show with your eyes closed, Lyle Bolton, was a character supposed to represent a republican extremist. You can tell by his room and by his use of the wording “liberal media”. Him kidnapping “random” people is him trying to control the city of Gotham to become what he thinks will be better.  

And…Commissioner Gordon…a random person?? HE’S THE POLICE COMMISSIONER!!!

Fourth statement “I also don’t understand the hate for him. The other Batman villains have done way worse. At least Lyle does something beneficial for Gothams society”  Again, the reason for his hate is because he abuses the patients of Arkham Asylum and other fans of the series actually have empathy. I think the crimes of Lyle Bolton vs The Rogues Gallery can be debated but someone else can do that. The entirety of Gotham Society is corrupted, That's why it’s the most crime filled place on earth. yknow what would make it better? An abusive head of security, so he can make the mentally ill patients even more mentally ill, so they can break out and reek havoc on the good people of Gotham.  

Fifth statement “I don’t understand why Bruce wouldn’t buy a better security system for Arkham in the first place. Bolton knows what he’s doing sooo” That's why Bolton got the job in the first place, because of his record but Bruce fired him because he mistreated mentally ill people. Arkham, while also holding mentally ill people holds geniuses, I find it difficult to believe that, let’s say The Riddler, a self-proclaimed genius would have a difficult time with a new “high tech” security in Arkham, the reason it was a wasn't a "revolving door" was because of the abuse. I personally, don’t think the entire problem with Arkham is the security but the doctors, funding, and the system itself.

IMPORTANT QUESTION FOR ANYONE WHO SEES THIS ‼️ Can you theoretically, simultaneously whip and nae nae? Me and my friends have been having a heated 2 HOUR DISCUSSION on this topic, bringing in science and math. So please say you’re intricate thoughts!!

@m0ldybreadd

@thedeanguy-exe

When I don't agree with someone's take on something but I shut my mouth instead of arguing because I don't like conflict that invovles me and I'm not good with getting my points across in an arguement.

Quick question with a bit of spoilers for spectre route of stp:

And why?

No

gonna start problems. oatmeal cookies are good

Is cheesecake a pizza? Y/N

Crust on the bottom, cheese on top.

I need help to settle a debate XD

My straight conservative vaugely homophobic stepmom v my explaination of alternative diy culture in relation to queerness and flagging. She got so confused she had to go look around target and come back??

None of the verses you sent about Slavery were in the Ten Commandments, they were either before or after it, The Gen commandments don't mention slavery, It goes like this.

The First Commandment, I am your God, You should only worship Me

Second Commandment, Do not worship any other "God" than Him

Third Commandment, do not make idol (graven image) and bow down to it

Fourth Commandment, is to not use God's name as a curse or in vain

Fifth Commandment, Keep the Sabbath Day and do not break it

Sixth Commandment, Honor your Mother and Father

Seventh Commandment, Do not Kill. Eighth, Do not commit Adultery (Cheating on your spouse) Ninth, Don't Lie And Tenth Commandment is Don't be jealous of your neighbor and steal from him or sleep with his wife. Slavery was never mentioned here or anywhere in Exodus 20. The Verses you DO mention are Exodus 21, A chapter after and not in the Ten Commandments.

I didn't say we shouldn't follow the Ten Commandments, But I said the Verses you put were meant for another time and another circumstance and thus do not apply today.

Exodus 20:17 is talking about being jealous of your neighbor and sleeping with his wife nor about making his wife a slave.

Jesus said

"I have not come to abolish the law but to fulfill it"

—Matthew 5:17

Considering there are multiple prophecies in the Old Testament relating to the messiah which were fulfilled by him, He is saying he won't abolish the laws but fulfill the prophecies of the Old Testament meaning we shouldn't have to follow the laws

Jesus did Stop A Woman accused of Adultery From being stoned to death in John 8.

A Pharisee brought the woman accused to him and told Jesus:

"Teacher" they said to Jesus, "This woman was caught on the very act of Adultery. Moses' Law says we have to kill her. What About it?"

—John 8:4

Jesus told them

"Whoever Is without sin throw the first stone"

—John 8:7

After writing something on the ground One by One they left

He then asked the woman:

"Where are your accusers? Didn't even one of them condemn you?"

When the Woman said no he said

"Neither do I, Go and sin no more"

—John 8:10-11

Jesus had challenged these laws throughout the old testament, he healed a people on the Sabbath which breaks the Filth Commandment.

The breaking of these laws and the pushing of boundaries are what led to his death.1 Timothy were not written by Jesus, It was a letter made by Paul the Apostle and 1 Timothy 2 are directions for Church and worship.

The parable of the three slaves is just that A Parable shouldn't be taken too seriously. that's the problem with Modern Day Atheists and Agnostics, you take things way too seriously. Jesus always spoke in these parables which were difficult to understand, he isn't saying we should Beat our slaves, he is telling a story with an underlining narrative.

The story of the three slaves shows the Master going away and tasking one slave with feeding the other, If the Slave in charge does a good job with feeding them he will be rewarded, but if he Whips the other two slaves goes out and gets drunk he will be thrown out by the slave master. Jesus is saying we should do good things and we will be rewarded, Not that we should own slaves and beat them.

(1/?)

following some liberal/progressive christian blogs on here is like will i see some profound insight into the nature of God or straight heresy

and then following conservative christian blogs is like will i see something that upholds tradition and is spiritually edifying or will i see someone who thinks women shouldn't have rights

Hey Tumblr, help me solve this debate I had with someone on Youtube

Who would Win?

Team Red: Daredevil, Deadpool and Spider-man

Team Green: She-Hulk and Hulk

Now as much as I love and respect both hulks, I have to say that team red would win. Here are my reasons

While both Hulk and She-Hulk are strong AF they both rely on strength more than skill. Team red relies a bit more on skill

The angrier Hulk gets the stronger he gets meaning the more he relies on strength

Spider-Man is holding back, when Doc. Ock once took over his body he knocked Green Goblins jaw off

Deadpool is basically immortal

Daredevil and Deadpool could distract She-Hulk while Spider-man takes Hulk down.

One person told me that Team Green would win. Please

I forgot to post yesterday but DPAN.TV had an interpreter team for the debate. You can still watch it.

[Transcript from DailyMoth.com:

Do you plan to watch the presidential debate on Tuesday night? Donald Trump versus Kamala Harris? DPAN announced that it would provide ASL interpreters, specifically Deaf interpreters, for the debate. You have to go to the website DPAN.tv. They will stream the debate from ABC News and add interpreters. It is a really nice way to experience the debate because whenever I watched debates with just captioning, it didn’t really show interruptions or crosstalk. The captions can’t keep up. But with interpreters, you can see both candidates talking at the same time, and any interruptions from the moderator. You can feel the tone, the drama, or the flow. Nice! So are you ready for tomorrow (Tuesday) night? 9 pm EST. Go to DPAN.tv. Thank you to DPAN for providing ASL access.

End transcript]

When someone disagrees with you online and demands you prove your point to their satisfaction by writing a complete and logically sound defense including citations, you can save a lot of time by not doing that.

Bro, I’ve known you for twelve seconds and enjoyed none of them, I’m not taking homework assignments from you.

MYSTERION OR LADY MCCORMICK

i’m starting to think i won’t get to wittness a trump v desantis debate which is sad, but probably for the better :/

“there is a violence between words”

i’m all about short lines that just sound good these days, it just sounds….cool

22 Messages From Creationists To People Who Believe In Evolution

I asked 22 self-identifying creationists at the Bill Nye/Ken Ham debate to write a message/question/note to the other side. Here's what they wrote.

I saw this article and I must admit, there was a lot of facepalm. After my initial facepalm session, I decided to redirect my despair and actually provide some answers.

Caveat: I make no claims of being any kind of expert, I just wanted to form my own ideas gleaned from a lot of miscellaneous reading into some kind of an answer that wasn't an incoherent stream of rage.

1.       “Bill Nye, Are you influencing the minds of children in a positive way?”

I would argue yes, Bill Nye espouses an evidence based, critical thinking centric way of looking at the world, is this a good thing? I’d argue yes, teaching children to look at things critically rather than just believing the first thing they’re told sounds fantastic to me – okay you might not want your children to ask awkward questions, but man the fuck up, that’s what children are for.

 2.       “Are you scared of a divine creator?”

Being scared of something is an acknowledgement and admission of its existence, so I doubt it very much. Besides, have you actually read the bible lately? The God of the Old Testament isn’t exactly warm and fuzzy. The question I ask in return is this: are you more afraid that ‘he’ does exist, or that he doesn’t?

 3.       “Is it completely illogical that the earth was created mature? (I.e. trees created with rings, Adam created as an adult”

In a word: yes. In more words: that makes absolutely zero fucking sense and presents a serious cosmic mindfuck.

 4.       “Does not the second law of thermodynamics disprove Evolution?”

Citation: “The second law of thermodynamics states that the entropy of an isolated system never decreases, because isolated systems spontaneously evolve toward thermodynamic equilibrium”

Short answer: not really, no. more here: http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/thermo/probability.html

 5.       “How do you explain sunset if there is no God?”

Well, the Earth revolves around that giant gaseous ball in the sky called the Sun, this is handy for us to see things by because the Sun produces light (as a by-product of a process of nuclear fusion and fission using hydrogen)

Due to certain other factors, the Earth also spins around a central axis (whilst revolving around the Sun too) meaning that only half of its surface points towards the big shiny thing in the sky at any given moment. This means that on the side that’s pointing away from the Sun it’s dark. On the edges between these zones you have either a sunrise (where that point of the earth is coming towards the Sun) or a sunset (where it’s moving away).

Ask a four year old’s question, get a four year old’s answer.

6.       “If the Big Bang theory is true and taught as science along with evolution, why do the laws of Thermodynamics debunk said theories”

See 4. Additional childish answer: “Because you touch yourself at night.”

7.       “What about Noetics?”

What the actual fuck do they have to do with anything?

8.       “Where do you derive objective meaning in life?”

From its brevity. You get one chance. There is no ‘round 2’ there’s no take-backsies, you live for an amount of time and then you’re not there anymore, to me the only real meaning we can derive is to make the best of it, to try and leave this tiny lump of rock better for our fleeting presence.

9.       “If God did not create everything, how did the first single-celled organism originate? By chance?”

There are thousands of possible hypotheses that can be (and are being) made on this subject, we may never actually know for sure – that’s one of the redeeming features of science, it doesn’t claim certainty until all the results are in (and often not even then.) What I’m driving at however, is that just because we don’t presently know for certain how the first cellular life arose, does not automatically default to “God did it!”

10.   “I believe in the Big Bang Theory… God said it and BANG it happened”

While this is an admirable attempt at marrying up Evolution and creation, it is an entirely unscientific one, I reiterate from above, just because we don’t know exactly how or why something happened doesn’t automatically mean “God did it!”

11.   “Why do Evolutionists/Secularists/non-God believing people reject the idea of there being a creator God but embrace the concept of intelligent design from aliens or other extra-terrestrial sources?”

Holy straw-man Batman! How about you ask these people this question? Perhaps you’ve just invented them for the purpose of this question or perhaps they believe in another religion (yes, those exist!)

12.   “There is no inbetween… the only one found has been Lucy and there are only a few pieces of the hundreds necessary for an ‘official proof’”

Wow… just wow, there are thousands of transitional fossils, just literally thousands – go and ask any university biology department, they have drawers full of the fuckers. But I know that creationists love transitional fossils, as soon as you’ve found one; now you have two gaps to be smug about.

13.   “Does metamorphosis help support Evolution?”

I don’t see why not, it’s an example of how animals change over time, how their forms are not fixed and how two animals of the same species will not necessarily develop the same way – sounds pretty good to me.

14.   “If evolution is a theory (like creationism, or the bible) Why then is evolution taught as a fact?”

Because creationism is at best a hypothesis, in basic terms it’s what you have before you get any supporting evidence. Evolution is a theory, one step below absolute fact – it’s taught as such because until evidence that discredits it is brought forward, it is considered as such. Remember please that gravity is referred to as a theory, did you leave your house this morning from the ground level or the top floor?

Additionally: the bible is what we call ‘a book’, not a theory.

15.   “Because science by definition is a “theory” – not testable, observable, nor repeatable. Why do you object to creationism or intelligent design being taught in school?”

What the actual fuck? ‘testable, observable and repeatable’ are exactly what science is. You throw a ball upwards, does it A) continue rising indefinitely? B) hover, ominously? or C) fall back to the ground, hopefully hitting you in the face? Congratulations, through a very basic bit of scientific reasoning you’ve just proved gravity and hopefully been hit in the face (saving me effort)

Why do people like myself object to creationism and ID being taught in schools? Because they are exactly opposite, they make zero scientifically provable claims, present zero evidence and are a waste of tax payers money.

16.   “What mechanism has science discovered that evidences an increase of genetic information seen in any genetic mutation or evolutionary process?”

The answer was in your own question: ‘mutation’. See: http://www.talkorigins.org/indexcc/CB/CB102.html

17.   “What purpose do you think you are here for if you don’t believe in salvation?”

I wouldn’t say we have a purpose; we’re here to be here, what we make of it from that is up to us.

18.   “Why have we only found 1 “Lucy” when we have found more than 1 of everything else?”

Because we haven’t? Multiple fossils of Lucy (Australopithecus) were found in the 70’s – Lucy is just the most famous of her kind.

19.   “Can you believe in ‘the Big Bang’ without faith?”

Believe is the wrong word, science has no use for faith. The scientific method at its very core is based on doubt, it’s based on asking the questions and finding out where they lead, not taking a stab at the answer and having faith that you’ve found the right one.

20.   “How can you look at the world and not believe someone created/thought of it? It’s Amazing!!!”

While I agree, it’s amazing, that doesn’t mean it has to have been intelligently designed/created. The existence a watch is in no way evidence of a watchmaker – upon further examination, you can provide a receipt to prove where the watch came from and then their records will show who made it. Just because that works for a watch doesn’t mean it works for a planet, do you have a receipt?

21.   “Relating to the big bang theory… where did the exploding star come from”

Okay, so the big bang was not caused by an exploding star. We’re talking about all the matter in what is now the universe compressed into a point, things that are compressed get hot and all that energy has to go somewhere.

Where did it come from originally? I don’t know, but again, that doesn’t automatically mean “God did it!”

22.   “If we came from monkeys then why are there still monkeys?”

We came from a common ancestor, that’s like saying “If me and my brother both came from the same parents, why do I still have parents?” the answer: you’re a fucktard.

I don't know why but I am very much envious of the recent class 9 and 10 students who read "Julius Caesar" and in class 11 and 12 they will study "Macbeth" (This is the current pro forma of ICSE and ISC English)

Now my story, in class 9 and 10 our batch read Merchant of Venice and in class 11 we had Macbeth, so as usual in class 12 we will continue with Macbeth.

Questions may arise like "Why are you envious?". My answer to that question is, Julius Caesar and Macbeth are similar. Even in one of the Acts of Macbeth, Mark Anthony and Caesar were referred. The ones who are studying Julius Caesar will have no problem in understanding the plot of Macbeth because both are same..

I am jealous of you Juniors. (I have never found any problem but we could get something to discuss if we had a little knowledge about Julius Caesar like Torko And Jukti to be specific, like we could have organized a debate in these topics where one would glorify Macbeth and another one Julius Caesar)

Me debato entre si eres inocente o ignorante

For the walrus-fairy debate.

My mom answered with no question walrus. My dad was very confused as to why we would believe in fairies and thus said fairy.

I’m team walrus, I don’t live near the sea and I don’t assume a walrus would knock. I’d be surprised if fairies existed but I would accept it.