DD (Daily Debate) 60 - Batman vs Iron man

Сообщение от Monday

Wasn't something like this tried in the US, or at least talked about? I don't know enough about the American bill of rights, but I do know if you even mention messing with it, that tends to annoy a lot of creepy guys in cammo gear with the type of guns you just talked about banning.

It depends on the state, IIRC. Obama helped pass a law prohibiting assault weapons, but, iirc, it's possible to get automatic weapons, depending on what type of permit you have.

Of course, it was several years ago that I knew someone with an automatic, so it's possible the laws have changed since then.

Сообщение от 207044

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 109094

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от gnomerdon

it's my constitutional right to bear arms and fight for my right.

Сообщение от 557473

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от gamerunknown

Who will make the machines that make the machines?

I think Chomsky brought up this point, saying there is always work that no-one wants to do and that we have a responsibility as a community to share in that burden. My own corollary is that if there are more capable people who won't volunteer to do it, that's their prerogative and the community will suffer as a result (reminded me of this, by the way).

Especially in Europe, just go across a border to a country with looser gun control laws

There are restrictions on stuff like milk and meat at borders, I'm fairly sure they'll check for firearms.

As for marriage: I think as long as it remains a right in the Universal Declaration and/or it confers the benefits you alluded to, people will continue to practice the tradition.

Сообщение от 331902

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от gnomerdon

marraige is not pointless

it's a sacred agreement between a man and women that they will love eachother forever until bankruptcy do them (us) part.

that being said, marraige is not for me.

Сообщение от FatalHeaven

To confirm facesmasher's statement:

It's sacred; not pointless.

You can be with someone for ten years and unless you're married it's just a simple (yet amazing, not trying to downgrade it) boyfriend/girlfriend, boyfriend/boyfriend or girlfriend/girlfriend situation.

Now take a couple who has been together the same amount of time who have tied the knot; you have now made an extremely sacred oath to never give up on that person no matter how hard it gets.

Just don't expect Kim Kardashian, Britney Spears or Larry King to keep that oath.

Сообщение от Adamsm

But common law partners exist as well; those who stick together for decades but never formally marry.

So to some people it's the ultimate sacred bound for a relationship, and for others it's just a piece of paper saying something.

Really, just depends on your definition of it that makes it 'pointless' or not.

Сообщение от 557473

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от yukonjack

If every measurable economic, legal and social benefit were to be ignored as a benefit to marriage then its value must lie in one or both of the peoples desire to be seen as married with gods blessing. Of course if you don't happen to believe in any form of god then it really does become pointless and the same thing can be accomplished with a legal contract.

Сообщение от FatalHeaven

Well, I will try to spice it up (note what I say might not be my true position and I am just monitoring/heating debate up) but why should we bind ourselves to on person? Is not love something we supposed to share with each other so why bind yourself with chains that limit you love spreading ability?

I respect what you're trying to do, but I really can't elaborate on that. I'm a monogamous type of person. Love is supposed to be shared. You can love many people but you should only (in my opinion) be in love and dedicated to one person.

Сообщение от 557473

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от FatalHeaven

No, I don't believe it is selfish. You really think people have that much love? Have you seen the divorce rates? I think you are confusing lust with love. Love is a dying trait.

Сообщение от 557473

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от gamerunknown

Well, there is EU wide legislation on gun control. Presumably if there are no border checks, the local police would enforce the law.

Сообщение от 557473

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от FatalHeaven

No, I don't believe it is selfish. You really think people have that much love? Have you seen the divorce rates? I think you are confusing lust with love. Love is a dying trait.

Keeping with my theory, divorces happen when you overfill each other with love and break the each other, but if you were outsourcing/sharing it everything would be fine. It is like filling balloon with water, it can take a lot bot at some point it is goign yo pop. (or there was no love to begin with)

I Lul'd. Divorces don't happen because of too much love. They happen because of a lack of it.

Сообщение от FatalHeaven

Continuation: DD 56 Monogamy vs Polygamy. SO, most people who responded to to marriage question were mostly referring to tradition/sacred value of marriage. But, today's marriage is monogamous, however polygamy was also tradition. So, why we are against polygamy if it is the same tradition as monogamy? What makes Monogamy better than Polygamy as tradition?

Depends on what you believe. I believe in monogamy because I believe marriage is sacred and should be shared with your soulmate; Not you're soulmate, your neighbor, the girl across town and your co-worker. To me, monogamy is the only way. Others may feel differently; that's their right.

DD (Daily Debate) 60 - Batman vs Iron man

Ответить