Military recruitment in schools is less education than propaganda


Military recruitment in schools is more propaganda than education.


Military recruitment in schools provides more propaganda than it does education.


All high schools accepting state funding should accept military recruiters once a year


If a high school is accepting state funding, the should allow military recruiters in schools at least once per year.


High schools that allow military recruiters on campus will allow the school to receive state funding.


Young people should hear of the opportunities available in the armed services whilst in school


It is a good idea to have military recruitment at schools to give students more opportunities.


Students will have more choices if military recruiters are able to be allowed in schools.


The military is an all-volunteer force and needs a percentage of school-age recruits each year


The all-volunteer military needs a percentage of school-age recruits every year.


Since the military is an all-volunteer force, a percentage of school-age recruits is needed every year.


Military recruiters downplay the risks of a military career, tempting schoolchildren into a career they would not have chosen with honest information.


Military recruiters decieve children about the risks of a military career, tempting them into a career they would not choose with honest information.


Since schoolchildren would not chose a military career with honest information, military recruiters downplay the risks of a military career to tempt them.


The purpose of the military entering schools is not solely recruitment but awareness


The military enters schools to promote awareness, not just recruitment.


The military enters schools not only for recruitment, but also to promote awareness.


School children are too young to target for military service


School children are too young to be targeted for military service.


The military should not target children for service as they are too young.


There was a lack of transparency in News Corp


News Corp's lack of transparency make it a suspect organization.


The lack of transparency in News Corp creates a overwhelming distrust in the public view.


Murdoch is morally unfit to run a powerful media company.


Rupert Murdoch is unfit to run a media company that has such broad influence.


Murdoch is unfit to run a company where morals need to matter.


Murdoch is effective at selling news


Murdoch is effective at selling news to the masses, sadly because of his lack of morals.


Murdoch excels at sensational headlines making for effective sales.


Even if we did think that animals were less intelligent than humans beings they should be protected by rights


animals are entitled to rights


living beings have basic rights


Animals should be left in the wild


There is no distinction between "natural" and synthetic methods of performance enhancement


Controlling, rather than ignoring, performance enhancing substances will improve competitive standards in sport


Allowing performance enhancing drugs in sports will lead to better competition and improved athletics.


Athletes should be free to take risks when training and competing


Taking more risks in training and competition would allow athletes the freedom to become the best competitors they can be.


Protecting young and vulnerable athletes


we must sanction the use of performance enhancing drugs in pro sports to protect young and vulnerable athletes.


Performance enhancing drugs are particularly dangerous to young and vulnerable athletes and should therefore be sanctioned.


Drugs will undermine the central philosophy of sport


Sports is about competing on a level playing field and allowing drugs will ruin that.


Sports will become even more dangerous for athletes if they are allowed to take performance enhancing drugs.


Many plays don’t lend themselves to video review


video cannot catch all plays at a game


With more accurate calls come more legitimate outcomes to games


Games can benefit from correct calls thanks to instant replay.


Wins and losses matter, so does the instant replay. It matters to get things right.


Accurate calls should be the top priority, and instant replay helps provide them


Major League Baseball should expand instant replay for more accurate calls.


Umpires Approve Instant Replay for Major League Baseball so they can make more accurate calls.


Instant replay supports the goal of making accurate calls


Using instant replay helps make sure the right calls are made


Instant replay might be deceptive or inconclusive


there is confusion in viewing instant replay


some things could be missed when viewing and instant replay during a game.


Instant replay will actually enhance umpires’ stature


Instant replay will make play caling easier on umpires.


Umpires will benfit greatly from instant replay in the MLB physically.


Instant replay will take the human element out of baseball


Why even have an umpire if every play can be instantly replayed?


It’s not possible to get every call right, so instant replay is a necessary supplement to umpires’ skill


Instant replay allows the proper rules to be put in place in the MLB.


The MLB should take up instant relay to make sure the umpires make the right calls.


Instant replay will take too long


Instant replay will make long MLB games even longer.


Instant replay drags ut calls most umpires can make already.


Tradition demands that this instant replay not be used


Instant replay is not beneficial to the game


Instant replay should not be used during baseball games


Music depicting violence to women causes and sustains the cycle of violence.


people are influenced by violent music


violent music harms families


To ban music that encourages violence against women would be done with the intention of protecting women; if it is necessary to paint them as the victims of violence that they are, that is a small price to pay. Furthermore, bans on child pornography would


If we change violent music, we can end the violence in society.


Violence is music leads to violence in real life, so ending violent music would lessen violence in real life.


A change is needed to stop the cycle of violence.


Music depicting violence against women encourages men (and women) not to respect women.


Both sexes are encouraged lose respect for women when music depicts violence against women.


Music depicting violence against women discourages respect of women in men and women.


The violent music encourages disrespect toward women


Music about violence against women  doesn't help the perception of women


It would be easy to apply restrictions on music.


It would be highly impractical to ban this music glorifying violence.


It would not be at all practical to ban music glorifying violence.


Banning this music that glorifies violence is totally impractical.


It is not realistic to expect a ban of violent music


To ban this type of music encourages the viewing of women as helpless, victim figures.


Women would be seen as helpless victims if we banned this type of music.


It would encourage the viewing of women as helpless victims if this type of music was banned.


Banning the music would only make women seen more like victims


By banning the music, women will continue to be viewed as helpless


This type of music is degrading to everyone, not just women.


this music harms women and others


Censoring Art Is Dangerous


It is dangerous to censor art.


Censoring art is extremely bad.


Harmful speech needs to be filtered


When harmful speech is glorified in music, it leads to bad things in real life.


Filtering hate speech will keep it out of the mainstream and out of our lives.


People are justified in listening to violent music


People have the right to listen to whatever music they want to.


Violent music can be listened to without people going out and doing what the music says.


A ban is necessary for progress in the status of women.


To ban violent music against weapon is to support positive status of women in society.


ban music that glorifies crime because of the influence it has on children


music that glorifies crime should be banned


music that glorifies crime needs to be banned


Defending hip hop artists’ right to free speech


everyone deserves free speech


hip hop artists have a right to free speech


Anarchy has nothing to contribute but violence.


Anarchist Communities have a very poor track record.


Even in societies with a state, anarchist groups provide a voice for the oppressed.


These groups are the beneficiaries who reap their profits by kindling the deep settled hatred of among the oppressed


The state has far too often been an instrument for facilitating wars and other acts of violence.


Community action is a more powerful tool than the state for providing goods.


Because democracy is the best form of government, it is not wrong-- and indeed may even be our obligation-- to bring it to those who do not have it.


Democracy is the correct way and everyone needs it.


Attempting to impose democracy may escalate conflict.


Promoting democracy promotes peace.


Peace can only be achieved only through a well functioning democracy


The desire for, and fight for, democracy must come from within or else democratic government will not be sustainable.


Imposing democracy can be a way to support individuals unable to fight for democracy themselves.


Democracy by its very nature cannot be imposed.


The imposition of democracy violates national sovereignty


Democracy denied violates rights of all.


No democracy means no freedom for a nation.


The Security council needs to be more democratic.


The current Security Council doesn't reflect the economic reality of the 21st century.


A rise in UN membership should be reflected also in an increase in Security Council members.


It should be reflected in the increase in Security Council members that there is a rise in UN membership.


The increase in Security Council members is something that needs to also be reflected in the rise of UN membership.


There is a growing imbalance between developing and developed countries representation in the Council.


A UNSC reform is very hard to achieve due to the many different interests and demands.


The many various interests and the demands makes a UNSC reform really tough to achieve.


If it wasn't for the various interests and demands. it wouldn't be so hard on achieving a UNSC reform.


Criminalisation will not stop radicalisation


Radicalisation cannot be stopped by criminalisation


Limiting communication of extremists can cripple their threatening agendas.


Extremist should not be allowed to use internet


It makes it more difficult for extremists to organize and spread their message when blocked


The internet is an echo chamber that will confirm extremists in their views if not stopped


Criminalisation creates more problems than it solves


Problems are not going to be stopped by criminalisation


The freedom of speech can be curtailed when it represents a serious threat to society


In some cases freedom of speech should be limited to protect a nation's security.


Serious threats to our society sometimes justify restricting a specific person or group's freedom of speech.


Blocking these sites makes it more difficult for extremist groups to coordinate extremist action in the real world


Blocking specific sites will disrupt extremist agendas that could threaten the free world.


Blocking these sites is one of our best preventative measures in combating extremists.


Everyone, even extremists, deserve their freedom of expression protected


Freedom of expression is a right guaranteed to all, and reducing or eliminating those freedoms is never acceptable.


Freedoms are not earned or deserved they are given to all people equally and no one should determine which agendas are too extreme to receive this protection.


Internet regulation is an attempt by big interest groups to regulate the internet in their favour


Internet regulation is necessary to ensure a safe internet


A regulated internet is a safe internet.


Internet regjulation is a euphemism for censorship


Internet governance is necessary to combat heinous crimes committed via the internet


Private Universities would risk reducing the quality of university degrees.


Allowing universities to be guided by an invisible hand does more harm than good


The principle of the invisible hand does not benefit universities.


Private universities are needed to increase the number of places for students.


It is necessary to have private universities to give students more places to go.


Private universities increase the places where students can study.


Private universities would increase the divide between the rich and poor


Social problems can be solved without resorting to physical punishments.


States' duty to avoid the use of force when solving social problems


It is the duty of the state to avoid using corporal punishment when they need to solve social problems.


Corporal punishment isn't a good idea when solving social problems.


States’ duty to avoid the use of force when solving social problems


Flogging will be over-utilised, rehabilitation will be under-utilised


Casinos are often used to mask criminal activity


Criminal activity often occurs at casinos.


Criminal activity is often hidden by casinos.


It is impossible to effectively ban gambling


Gambling is too popular to ban entirely.


Trying to ban gambling is a waste of time.


Gambling is addictive and psychologically harmful


It is difficult for someone to stop gambling and it harms an individual psychologically.


Gambling is damaging to the psyche and addictive.


Gambling leads to the disintegration of families


Families are negatively impacted by the presence of a gambler.


Gambling has a severe negative impact on families.


Online gambling has increased the incidence of gambling addiction


Casinos create positive economic effects in the communities that host them


Many communities benefit from the income from casinos.


Casinos support local communities financially.


Gambling is associated with other forms of addiction and harmful behaviour


Other addictions and harmful behaviors often accompany gambling.


Gambling is often only one of a number of addictions and harmful behaviors displayed by an individual.


Gambling is simply a leisure pursuit


Citizens of western liberal democracies should never be required to adhere to religious norms that they do not hold


In a democratic society, even religious norms can be questioned.


All of society benefits from protection of indigenous culture


Indigenous culture brings things to the table that are of benefit to society.


We cannot understand ourselves if we cannot understand others, so protection of indigenous culture is important.


The preservation of displaced cultures is important in preventing future oppression.


We must learn from past mistakes and preserve displaced cultures .


In the past we have oppressed native peoples and we must learn from that so we do not do it again.


Government interference is not necessary to preserve culture


Existing states are responsible for the destruction of indigenous populations and their societies, and thereby have an obligation to help reverse the effects of their actions


Wrongs must be righted where indigenous populations have been harmed.


Repair of past errors in treatment of indigenous peoples is an obligation of those who benefited.


Culture provides no tangible benefit that justifies the use of government funds to preserve it.


The focus of elections should be on policy, not personal issues like financial records


Financial records are personal, not political, issues.


Political candidates should focus on policy and not be subjected to scrutinization of their financial records.


Individuals have a right to privacy, including to their own financial records


Forcing candidates to post their full financial history violates their privacy.


Political candidates' rights would be violated if they were forced to post their financial records online.


Financial dealings can indicate candidates’ willingness to circumvent the system/play by the rules


By releasing financial info, a candidate shows his honesty


By releasing financial info, a candidate shows his openess and willingness to comply


Candidates' willingness to circumvent the system/play by the rules can be indicated by financial dealings.


Financial dealings can tell a candidates' willingness to circumvent the system/play by the rules.


Voters have a right to know the background of their would-be representatives, including financial background


Every one running for office must show their tax returns


Running for office should make your life an open book


Voters deserve to know the background including financial background of their would-be representatives.


The would-be representatives should disclose their complete background including financial background to the voters who have a right to know.


Fixating on candidates’ financial records fuels the fire of class war


Too much focus on candidates' finances only leads to class wars.


Candidates posting their full financial history online would only intensify class wars.


This information offers valuable texture to the financial proposals candidates offer as potential policy


Candidates' full financial history allows voters to consider the financial proposals candidates may offer as potential policy.


Political candidates' full financial history offers valuable texture with regard to potential financial policies candidates may offer.


Transparency prevents, or corrects, mistakes


Transparency would make mistakes easier to prevent or identify.


Without transparency, mistakes would be easier to come by and more difficult to correct.


In security too much transparency endangers lives


Too much transparency can be dangerous.


Putting all your information out there is not safe.


Too much transparency can come at the cost of human lives


Lives can be endangered if there is too much transparency


Transparency can result in normalisation


Collisions are an example of violence that has no place in baseball.


collisions and violence should not be in baseball


Collisions are not as dangerous as they’re feared to be.


Collisions are not necessarily dangerous.


Collisions in MLB aren't all that bad.


The safety concerns about collision are overblown


There is an overreaction to the dangers of collisions


Collisions are unnecessary.


collisions are not good


Collisions are a part of the game.


It's a major part of the game.


Collisions happen in baseball and should be left as is.


Collisions are just part of the game of baseball


One of the things that is part of baseball is having collisions


Collisions are dangerous and lead to injury.


collisions are very dangerous


Without collisions, either the catcher or the runner would have an enormous and unfair advantage.


The catcher or runner would have a ridiculous advantage if collisions were not allowed.


Banning collisions would fundamentally change portions of the game.


Taking away collisions would give an advantage to one side


By taking away collisions, you would give one side an unfair advantage


Collisions are exciting and fun to watch.


Collisions are an exciting part of the sport.


Physicality is an important and fun part of major league baseball.


Collisions are an exciting part of the game


It is exciting to watch a collision


A winter cup would harm media revenue


A winter cup would cause financial loss.


A winter cup would cost us fiscally.


Media revenue would be harmed by a winter cup.


A winter cup would negatively impact the media revenue.


Heat will damage player's health


heat can hurt the health of a player


heat can hurt people


It would Interfere with other competitions


It would cause interference as concerning other competitions.


It would create interference where other competitions are concerned.


There would be interference with other competitions.


Other competitions would be interfered with.


Moving now would be unfair to the other bidders


To move now would be against the other bidders.


It wouldn't be just to move now for the other bidders.


It would be unfair to the other bidders for it to be moved now.


If the move were to occur now there would be a lack of fairness to the other bidders.


A sporting event in the heat of a desert summer will not be a pleasant experience for the fans


heat is not good for sports


heat at events hurts sporting fans


We must practice what we preach


Further protections are required to grant migrants full human rights.


There is a need to ensure a baseline of inherent rights for migrant individuals.


A collective decision by sovereign national entities should be made to upgrade the rights of migrants.


Migrants ought to have a right to family reunification.


Migrants should have their rights to their families being together upheld.


The protection of migrants to be as one as a familial unit is important and should be guaranteed.


Protections of migrants will hurt the economies of receiving countries by overcrowding them and taking away jobs from citizens.


Migrants will negatively impact the economy and employment of the receiving countries.


Granting migrants right hurts the economy and employment.


Economic and social protections prevent the exploitation of migrants.


Migrants are protected by economic and social regulations.


Economic and social rights will protect migration from potential exploitation.


An international regulatory body should exist for global migration.


An official, worldwide body should be present to ensure the rights of migrants.


A universally recognized agency is necessary to protect and defend migrants.


Migration policy should be crafted on a state-by-state basis, allowing countries to protect their national identities.


Receiving countries should not and cannot afford to further protect migrants because they often free ride on health, education, and welfare systems.


The protection on migrants will causes them to exploit the nation's health, education and welfare systems.


Getting nations ought not and can't stand to additionally secure transients since they regularly free ride on wellbeing, instruction, and welfare frameworks.


Getting countries should not and can't remain to moreover anchor drifters since they consistently free ride on prosperity, guidance, and welfare structures


Universal migrant “protections” are an affront to state sovereignty.


Protections would benefit the economies of receiving as well as source countries.


The protection of migrant rights would yield a fiscal benefit to all involved entities.


Ensuring the protection of migrants would be a winning situation for all economies.


Protection of migrants causes “brain drain,” which further damages the economies of source countries.


Migrants rights incur economy cost and "brain drain" in the receiving countries.


Migrants rights hurts the labor powers in the receiving countries, and have a negative impact on society.


Insurance of vagrants causes "cerebrum deplete," which further harms the economies of source nations.


Protection of vagrants causes brain depletion  which further harms nations' economies of source


Having children is our duty and responsibility


It is our mission to have children


The purpose of life is to have children


The act of having children makes people more desirable citizens.


Having children makes you a better citizens


People are better citizens when they have children


Profiling is effective and necessary:


Profiling is racist:


Genetic screening may lead the marginalisation of those living with genetic disorders


People with genetic disorders will be marginalized by genetic screening.


Parents have a right to acquire and act upon medical information


With proper medical information, parents should be allowed to screen fetuses.


Parents should have the right to screen for heritable diseases.


Liberal societies have a duty to minimise avoidable suffering that might affect their members


Parents in liberal societies have a duty to minimize avoidable suffering, so parents should be allowed to genetically screen fetuses.


Genetic testing ensures the best quality of life for children vulnerable to heritable diseases


A screening culture may lead to the value of human life becoming distorted


Alternatives are better


Repatriation is expensive and unrealistic


There needs to be a tough stance to prevent illegal immigration.


Repatriation is immoral


It's wrong to send someone back to their own country.


People should not be made to return to their own country, it's just wrong!


Benefits spread across the country


Empty seats


Helps small businesses


It assisted mom-and-pop shops


It was helpful to entrepreneurs.


Help to small businesses.


Small business help.


The ACN in Gabon shows what can be done by smaller African nations


Cost could be spent on other things


Chess ought to qualify as an Olympic sport


It would be appropriate for Chess to become an Olympic sport.


Chess is currently not an Olympic sport, but it should be.


chess should be included in the list of Olympic sport


Opening up the Olympics for borderline sports is bad in itself


Chess lacks the necessary physical activity


Olympic sports are suppose to be physical


Chess is highly popular and should be represented


Chess is popular worldwide and should be an Olympic sport.


The popularity of Chess worldwide sets it up as an appropriate Olympic sport.


Chess is one of the popular sport that should be represented at the Olympic.


Introducing chess would preserve the spirit of the ancient Olympic Games


Chess cannot ensure fair play


Mind sports are some of the world's oldest and most contested competitive sports.


Mind sports have been around for centuries and are competitive.


Mind sports is the oldest and most highly competitive sports.


Creative commons is not a good option for many government works


Government tends not to like creative commons.


It's best for government not to use creative commons as an option.


The creative commons is a more effective means for artists to build and expand their reach and markets than traditional copyright licensing arrangements


The Creative Commons licenses allows artists to reach their full potential.


Artists are better off when using creative commons licenses.


People have a right to know where their information comes from


People should know where information came from.


Legally requiring disclosure from all benefits think tanks


Disclosure should be require initially by law.


By law disclosure should be discussed at the start.


Overregulating think tanks sets a dangerous precedent


A dangerous precedent is set when you regulate think tanks.


Private investors have a right to privacy


Privacy is a right to private investors.


The right to privacy includes private investors.


Think tanks should be able to choose not to know who funds them


Think tanks do not need to know where their funding is from.


It is not neccesary for think tanks to know who funds them.


Think tanks may become smoke screens for criminal groups


Crime groups use think tanks to confuse people.


Think tanks should be assessed by the value of their ideas, not by who funds them


Who funds a think tank is unimportant to the value of their ideas.


No one will ever actually look at the information


Lack of trust


There is no trust


Trust is missing.


There are safeguards to prevent misuse


The use of meta data causes unintentional harm


Abuse of information and power by intelligence agencies


Agencies use surveillance to abuse their power.


Power trips can be had by agencies.


Loss of Privacy


People will lose their privacy.


Privacy will go away.


information gathered used to fight terrorism


information gathered  can be used to fight terrorism .


information gathered can be used to fight against radical terrorists.


Cant enforce an online gambling ban


An online gambling ban would be impossible to enforce.


A ban on online gambling would not feasible because police would not be able to enforce it.


Gambling is addictive.


Continuing to gamble will lead to addiction.


There is a addiction connected to gambling.


Gambling is bad for you.


Gambling is not good for someone like you.


You should not gamble because it is bad.


Online gambling affects families


Online gambling has adverse effects on family relationships.


Families are indirectly effected by online gambling.


Government only objects to online gambling because they dont benefit


If the Government could receive tax dollars on online gambling, they would support it.


Government officials only oppose online gambling because it is not taxed.


Online gambling encourages crime


The practice of gambling causes people to become involved in criminal activity.


Online gambling and criminal activity go hand in hand.


Individual targeting undermines market and political fairness


This advertising strategy provides benefits by making marketing more efficient and allows smaller markets to develop


This advertising strategy undermines people’s right to personal privacy


The storing and sale of personal data aids companies by making marketing more efficient and allows niche markets to thrive


The sort of information being kept and sold is legitimate for firms to utilize in this fashion


Data breaches can result in huge amounts of personal data falling into unscrupulous hands


Domestic intelligence services are the only organization that is capable of performing counterintelligence


Counterintelligence can provide services within a democracy and are the only ones qualified to do it.


Only a domestic intelligent service can provide counterintelligence.


Intelligence agencies inflate threats.


Intelligence agencies exaggerate the nature of threats.


Intelligence agencies use hyperbole when describing threats.


Threats are exaggerrated by intelligence agencies.


It can be self-serving for intelligence agencies to over exaggerate threats.


Domestic intelligence agencies cannot be controlled


It is too difficult to control domestic intelligence services.


Domestic intelligence services lack the oversight to be controlled.


There is an inability to control domestic intelligence agencies.


Intelligence agencies operating domestically are unable to be controlled.


The government does not have the right to spy on its citizens


The government has no right to spy on citizens.


Citizens have a right to privacy against the government.


Government sponsored domestic intelligence cannot be allowed to spy on citizens.


Citizens have the right to expect privacy and not be spied on by domestic intelligence agencies.


Intelligence is necessary for the safety of the public.


Societies are protected by the activities of intelligence .


Intelligence agencies provide safety to those living in a democracy.


People should be allowed to take their leisure at their own convenience and not on the basis of religious decree


Recreation should be when people want, not when told to by religion


Religious decrees infringe on people's freedom of choice


A shared day when there is no commercial activity encourages family life and recreation


Family life will be strengthened during a shared day of Sabbath


Sabbath day puts the emphasis on family and away from commercial activity


If you ban one thing, you have to ban lots of things.


The banning of religious symbols in public could cause an outcry for other public bans.


Banning religious symbols in public could lead to the banning of public political affiliation symbols.


Religious symbols cause division within Western society.


In the West, religious symbols create division.


Religious symbols are a reason for division within Western society.


Banning religious symbols is just a way of unfairly targeting people.


The banning of religious symbols in public will always be a controversial issue.


Religious symbols in public offend some people.


Religious symbols cause problems in schools.


When you have religious symbols in schools, there will be problems.


We should not will a world where killing is acceptable in to existencele in to existence


It is unacceptable to live in a world where killing is ever justified, no matter how many lives it may save.


We cannot support a world where killing is acceptable as long as it saves lives.


Intuitively, it is possible to understand that participating in a decision to kill is a priori wrong


Intiution explains the reason why the decision to kill is viewed as wrong ,as a general principle.


The possibility for the universal recogonition that killing is wrong can be deduced by pure intuition.


Give a choice, all rational individuals would prefer to live in a world in which behaviour prefered the choice to sacrifice one to save many


When presented with the choice, logical citizens would choose to live in a society that valued the will of the people versus the will of the few.


All educated people would prefer to live in a world that aligned itself with the principle of saving many at the expense of one, if presented the choice.


Museums preserve and display our heritage and therefore should be accessible to all of the public free of charge


Since museums essentially maintain our collective histories, there should be free access to all citizens.


Museums exist as an archive of our shared experiences and history, and as such, should grant access to all without charge.


State funding should be used elsewhere


Funding for museums is wasteful


We should not expect the state to fund museums


Museums are a crucial source of inspiration and education


Museums are a necessary part of a society's understanding of culture and edification.


Museums are critical to the motivations as well as the education of a society as a whole.


Museum charges can be offset by government funding


Free museums encourage attendance


People are more likely to attend museums if they are free.


If state-funded, there is little incentive to increase numbers of visitors


Celibacy is outdated


We live in the 21st century so we should keep outdated practices like priestly celibacy.


There is no longer any reason to maintain celibacy of priests.


Clerical rape of children is, in part, due to the celibacy of priests and must change


If priests were not forced to be celibate, the issue of child rate would not be as widespread.


One of the reasons clerical child rape has happened is due to priests being forced to remain celibate.


Taxes cannot be justified while the network is poor


Will the investigation get anywhere; who should be prosecuted?


Will the investigation bear fruit? Will someone be prosecuted?


Animals can suffer like humans do, so it is speciesism to experiment on them while we refrain from experimenting on humans.


While both people and animals both suffer, most animals suffer more than people do.


Most animals can suffer more than some people


People can suffer, but most animals can suffer more.


Animal researchers treat animals humanely, both for the animals' sake and to ensure reliable test results.


Animals are treated well during animal testing.


Research animals are well treated


Animals do not have rights, therefore it is acceptable to experiment on them.


Animals don’t have human rights


Animals don't have rights.


Harming animals is a bad thing.


Animals shouldn't be put through harmful situations.


Animals are severely harmed by research done on them.


When research is done on animals, it causes them severe harm.


Animals shouldn’t be harmed


Animal research causes severe harm to the animals involved


Testing is needed for really new drugs


We need to be able to test drugs on animals.


Animal research is only used when it’s needed


We try to only use animal testing when it is needed.


Sometimes we have no other choices for Animal research, but then to do some animal testing.


Animal research ensures greater safety for humans


Animal testing has contributed to many life-saving cures and treatments.


Without animal research, we would have fewer products


Animal research has played a vital role in a great many of the major medical advances of the last century


There are no satisfactory alternatives to animal research


Animal testing is cruel and inhumane.


Drugs that pass animal tests are not necessarily safe.


Animals themselves benefit from the results of animal testing.


Most animals that are used in scientific testing have better lives.


Religious traditions allow for human dominion over animals.


Alternative testing methods now exist that can replace the need for animals.


Number 2 is a lie, there ARE alternatives to animal testing! Other companies use them, and animal testing doesnt prove anything, because although close, they arent people.


Animal tests may mislead researchers into ignoring potential cures and treatments.


Animal tests do not reliably predict results in human beings.


Animal tests are more expensive than alternative methods and are a waste of government research dollars.


Religious traditions tell us to be merciful to animals, so we should not cause them suffering by experimenting on them.


Animals often make better research subjects than human beings because of their shorter life cycles.


Animals are the only choice for testing.


Animals are appropriate research subjects because they are similar to human beings in many ways.


Some cosmetics and health care products must be tested on animals to ensure their safety.


Medical breakthroughs involving animal research may still have been made without the use of animals.


Medical breakthroughs can be achieved without doing any scientific or commercial experiment on animals


95% of animals used in experiments are not protected by the Animal Welfare Act.


many companies get accurate results without testing on animals


Animal testing dosen't ensure good results


Animal experiments retard medical progress due to providing misleading results


animal experiments are not always accurate


A legal transaction is the only way to achieve free exchange of value


Downloaders spend more on music


It is well know that people that download also purchase the most.


Downloads are also big spenders.


Censorship is fundamentally incompatible with the notion of free speech.


Internet Content must not be Censored because we are a country of free speech!


Internet censorship a violation of freedom of speech


People often react poorly to being censored by their governments.


Governments have a moral duty to protect its citizens from harmful sites.


The internet must be censored to protect society


Internet Nazis must be censored!


Even sites that appeared innocent have had a devastating effect on society.


It is difficult to ascertain at a glance which websites are harmful.


The Internet is a free domain and cannot becontrolled by the government.


The government has no control over free domain and therefore cannot censor the internet.


As an extensive form of media, the Internet should be subject to regulation just as other forms of media are.


Other forms of media are regulated and the internet is no different.


We must apply the same standards to internet regulation that we apply to all media.


The government here may legitimately limit ‘free speech’.


Evolution undermines meaning and morality


Evolution has taken away the stories that create morals and meaning to many people.


Evolution does not explain morals or guidelines to a way of life.


The fossil evidence


Creationism has been dispproved because of the evidence of fossils.


Creationism can't explain the fossil record.


The Bible says God created the world


Much of the complexity of life cannot be explained by evolution, but is perfectly explained by Creationism.


Creationism has theoretical answers to questions evolution can't answer.


Evolution cannot answer irreducible complexity like Creationism can.


There is no empirical evidence supporting Creationism, whereas all evidence supports abiogenesis and evolution.


The scientific community as a whole overwhelmingly rejects Creationism.


Creationism isn't supported by the scientific community.


Aid can ensure better treatment of migrants


Finances are need to support influxes of immigrants.


If there is no shortage of money, then immigrants will be accepted and treated better.


Tackling hazardous environments


Civil society is good for economic development


economic developement can be benefited by civil society


Western European experiences do not demonstrate that civil society’s involvement in politics would be positive in the African context


There is no proof that western European involvement in politics would be beneficial to Africa.


History has shown that western European involvement would not be beneficial to Africa.


Reform would strengthen the House of Lords


the house of lords would be strengthened by reform


to strengthen the house of lords use reform


The House of Lords is out of touch with the electorate.


The House of Lords does not understand the needs of the citizens they serve.


The current House of Lords is undemocratic


The public is apathetic to reform.


an apathetic public can be the cause of reform


PMCs are untrustworthy


PMCs are unpredictable.


PMCs can not be trusted.


PMCs can be made much more legitimate by regulation


PMCs attract less attention and suspicion and can carry out their role more effectively.


PMCs are a valuable resource


PMCs have an equally strong incentive to perform.


strong incentive to perform is equal with PMCs


PMCs provide a service that may be otherwise unavailable.


there are some services that you cannot get without PMC's


Government was required to drive through major changes such as drives for equality within society, universal education, and preservation of the environment. Mostly in the teeth of big business


Creates animosity towards religious groups


Handguns are uniquely dangerous when compared with other weapons


A handgun ban reduces crime and deaths


The result of a handgun ban is lower crime and fewer deaths.


Lower crime rates and fewer deaths result when handguns are banned in a city.


Individuals Should Not Have the Right to Bear Arms in DC


DC is unique and individuals should not have the right to bear arms.


The individual right to bear arms should be restricted in DC.


The DC Handgun ban is inconsistent with other legislation in the U.S.


The majority of Americans support allowing the concealed carry of handguns.


Many of the American adults are in favour of carrying concealed handguns


Carrying a concealed handgun could help stop a public shooting spree.


In view of the continuous public shooting , carrying a concealed handgun by adults can stop such shooting spree


The occurrence of public shooting spree can be prevented by the usage of concealed handguns by adults


Hand Guns Are Required For Self Defence.


Concealed carry application requirements and background checks do not prevent dangerous people from acquiring weapons.


Individuals who should not own weapons are not prevented from purchasing them despite the requirements and background investigations of concealed carry applications


The conditions for concealed carry permits and background checks do not inhibit criminals from obtaining weapons


Public safety should be left to professionally qualified police officers, not private citizens with little or no expert training.


The safety of the public should be the responsibility of trained police officers, rather than private citizens with minimal training


Only police officers, who have received professional qualifications, should protect the safety of the public, not private individuals who have not received such training


Carrying a concealed handgun increases the chances of a confrontation escalating and turning lethal.


The act of having a concealed handgun on one's person increases the likelihood of an argument increasing in intensity and resulting in death


Concealed carrying of weapons results in a greater chance of a conflict becoming more intense to the point of death of one party.


More parity is necessary between corporations and the regular individuals.


Obama has already attempted to increase transparency.


There needs to be reform to campaign finance law.


The United States can reduce domestic demand for drugs through education


The War on Drugs has failed and there needs to be a new dialogue to decide on the course forward


Judicial and Penal reform is needed


The United States must find a ‘third way’


Allowing drug use is wrong – Prohibition must remain


Personality politics is harmful to the democratic process


Celebrities becoming involved in politics can be detrimental to democracy.


Celebrity involvement can act as a ‘gateway’ to get more people engaged in politics


Celebrities offer a means for people to become invested in politics, and to vote.


Citizens are more likely to become interested in politics and commit to vote if celebrities are more involved in politics.


Celebrity involvement can highlight minority interests


Celebrities getting involved shows a highlight on the minority interests.


Where celebrity involvement is concerned, it shows a highlight in minority interests.


This is an unjust use of unelected power


The prevalence of celebrities in politics to sway opinions is unjust, and a bad use of unelected power.


Celebrities abuse their unelected power when becoming involved in politics.


Hold politicians to account


Have your say


Voice your opinions.


My vote does not count


My vote is not helpful.


When I vote, I don't feel like the vote I have is important.


Civic duty


Politicians will simply ignore how we vote


Politicians will not pay any attention to our votes.


Our votes will not be acknowledged by our representatives.


Politicians don’t engage with issues that are important to me


Politicians don't care about engaging with me about issues that matter for me.


We don’t just vote for ourselves


We vote not just for ourselves.


When we vote, its not just for ourselves.


The New START treaty helps Russia more than the US


The New START treaty favors Russia over the US.


The New START treaty is better for Russia than for the US.


The New START treaty harms US nuclear capabilities


The US Nuclear capabilities are hurt by the New START treaty.


There is harm to the nuclear capabilities of the US by New START treaty.


The New START treaty maintains US nuclear and missile defence.


The 'Middle Way' has international support


The Dalai Lama is no longer relevant to Tibet's future


Puerto Rico would benefit economically from statehood


Statehood would be an economic benefit for Puerto Rico.


Statehood would bring economic gains to Puerto Rico.


Statehood is economically beneficial.


Puerto Rico would have a better economy  if it were a state.


Puerto Ricans deserve full political rights and citizenship


Residents of Puerto Rico deserve the full political rights and citizenship of other Americans.


Puerto Ricans should have political rights and citizenship status equal to other Americans.


Puerto Ricans should be US citizens.


Peurto Rico should be an American state.


English is not a problem for Puerto Rican statehood


Puerto Rican statehood is not economical for the US


Puerto Rican statehood will not benefit the US economically.


Making Puerto Rico a state is not a good economic decision for the US.


Becoming a state would hurt the other 50 states.


It would be better for the US if Puerto Rico does not become a state.


One person, one vote is a basic principal of democracy when the vote of one person is worth 10,000 time as much as that of another is simply undemocratic


All votes should be equal.


It is not democratic for some votes to be worth more than others.


The disproportionate influence of former politicians inevitably benefits old, powerful, white men


Candidates solicitation of superdelegates damages the political system and requires candidates to go through contortions to secure their support


Opinion polls are a forum for public expression and should be protected


Opinion polls provide useful information to politicians.


Politicians can rely on opinion polls.


One way that politicians learn about the public is through opinion polls.


Immunity for politicians is an unjust double standard


Immunity creates a perverse incentive to hang on to their office as long as possible.


Politicians should be able to make difficult decisions without fear that selecting one option will lead to their incarceration.


The ability to prosecute politicians is the ultimate protection against the abuse of power.


Seeing a politician put on trial hurts the integrity of their office.


The public may have less respect for an office if the officeholder is put on trial


In the event of major abuses of power it should be the public that holds politicians to account.


The public should be made aware of major abuses of power so that they can hold politicians accountable


Immunity for politicians hurts the image of their office


Giving politicians’ immunity from prosecution allows them to focus on performing their duties


If politicians are less worried about prosecution, they may be more inclined to do more


Immunity from prosecution allows politicians more freedom to do what they think is right in their office


Uniting Ireland would bring about an end to sectarian violence


Violence would end if Ireland was a united country.


It would be easier to protect the rights of religious minorities within a united Ireland


A united Ireland would bring religious peace.


The majority of the inhabitants of Northern Ireland do not support unification


Unification is not supported in the Ireland factions.


Unification would be damaging for the economies of both parts of Ireland


Unification would reignite civil disorder and violent factionalism among Irish communities


Civil war will result between Irish factions if unity occurs.


Unifying Ireland will result in public disorder and unrest in the country.


The reconciliation process provides access to justice in post conflict states


Truth and reconciliation process paving way for justice


reconciliation helps with justice


Reconciliation can be used to conceal political corruption and patrimony


reconciliation can be used for political corruption


reconciliation can help to conceal corruption


Truth and reconciliation are more important than retribution following violent and long term conflicts


Negative campaigning reduces the diversity and representativeness of government.


Negative campaign divides the nation and its people


Negative campaigns reduce diversity


Negative campaigns helps reduce diversity


Existing methods of disciplining and controlling candidates are ineffective.


Negative campaigning creates voter apathy and prevents accurate reporting of candidates’ policies and ideologies.


Negative campaigning can create voter apathy


Negative campaigning leads to negative governance.


Negative campaigns can lead to negative governing.


Negativity in campaigns can lead to a government that is negative.


Socialism was a twentieth century ideology which ran its course and ran out of steam when it became clear that Capitalism worked better


Capitalism replaced Socialism because it's the better system.


Socialism died out, making way for Capitalism.


Socialism has changed historically to meet the challenges of the moment and is addressing those of the 21st century in new ways


Socialism can be molded to fit the needs of the moment.


Socialism is a an ever changing set of principles that can be applied in new ways to meet the challenges of a changing world.


socialism have changed and adapted to meet the upcoming challenges of the 21st century


Even the leaders of the Left have given up on Socialism as a creed and have now accepted the vast majority of modern Capitalist principles


Socialism is no longer seen as a viable option and even the Left has accepted that Capitalism is a better system.


Capitalist principles are now being seen as a better option than Socialism even by the leaders of the Left.


even left side leaders have accepted capitalism pirnciples and have given up on socialism as a creed


Even the left fielders are now accepting capitalist principles over socialism in term of real way of life


Globalisation has made socialism impractical to implement


Incentive in form of profit benefits society as a whole


Socialism is a more secure system than the free market in Capitalism


Socialism outranks capitalism in security.


Capitalism is less secure than socialist systems.


The United States need to maximise the effectiveness of its atomic weaponry program before it could be compromised


In order to continue to protect itself effectively, the United States must upgrade the effectiveness of its atomic weapons program.


The United States must not allow it's atomic weaponry programs to become compromised.


the mazimization of the efectiveness of the united states atomic weaponry program are needed before it could be compromised


before the atomic weaponry program could be compromised, the united states need to maximise its effectiveness


A negotiated peace would have been preferable to the dropping of the atomic bombs


Talking it out would have been preferable.


Peace could have been reached via talks and negotiations.


Dropping atomic bombs could have been preferably avoided with peace talks.


A peaceful negotiation would have been a better option than setting off atomic bombs.


It was not necessary to use atomic weapons on a population centre


Bombing highly populated areas is wrong.


It is not required to bomb large cities.


Using atomic weapons in a populated area was not necessary.


The use of atomic bombs was the only was to persuade Japan's rulers to surrender


The inability of Japan's rulers to back down made it necessary to use the atomic bombs against them.


Dropping the atomic bombs on Japan was the only way to make them surrender and stop the war.


atomic was the answer for japan's ruler to surrender


using nuclear bomb was necessary way to persuade japan's ruler to surrender


The continuation of a conventional war would have been much costlier than an atomic attack


The cost of dropping the atomic bombs was much less than continuing to fight a costly war.


Continuing the war was draining the countries resources making it necessary to end it by dropping the atomic bombs.


the continuation of the war without the nuclear bomb would have been much costlier


one time atomic attack was less costly then the continuation of the war convenstional way


The bombing was immoral and illegal


The bombing was wrong and not moral.


It was illegal to drop the bombs as they were.


Not only was the bombing illegal, it was morally wrong!


The legality and morality of the bombing is questionable.


The Republican Party has been hijacked by the Tea Partiers who simply don’t have a coherent message or ideology


The Tea party has totally hijacked the Republican Party with their incoherent ideas.


The incompetent ideologies and messages from the Tea Party have taken over the Republican Party.


Having won the economic argument during the Reagan years – both with Russia and the Democratic Party – the Republicans now address social concerns and do so with a consistent message.


The leadership of the Republican Party simply has nothing to do with its membership as a result no candidate has, or can, capture the imagination.


Just as with other parties around the world, once the dominant argument of a political party proves to be a busted flush it takes about a decade to recover


The Electoral College ensures that all parts of the country are involved in selecting the President of the United States.


The electoral college prevents a tyranny of the majority.


The electoral college weakens incentives for voting and party building.


The electoral college makes certain voters decline to vote.


Voters and party builders are undermined by the electoral college.


With the electoral college in place, it weakens people's incentives for voting.


The electoral college goes against the democratic system because it hinders party building and has a negative impact on voting.


The electoral college forces candidates to win broad coalitions across the country, encouraging national harmony.


Casting votes by state forces candidates to be attentive to local interests, which they would otherwise ignore in a national campaign.


The electoral college violates the democratic principle of equality in voting


The electoral college violates principles of equity.


America's electoral college should be done away with because it violates the democratic principle of equality in voting.


The electoral college is just a violation of voter equality.


The electoral college violates the democratic principle that the winner should be the candidate receiving the most votes.


The electoral college goes against the idea that whoever earns the most votes wins.


The electoral college is just a violation of democratic principles and should be abolished.


The reasons for which the Founding Fathers created the Electoral College are no longer relevant.


The Electoral College gives too much power to "swing states" and allows the presidential election to be decided by a handful of states.


The Electoral College ignores the will of the people.


The Electoral College guarantees certainty to the outcome of the presidential election.


Scotland needs English economic muscle as through the Barnett formula England, especially the Southeast effectively subsidizes the rest of the UK in general and Scotland in particular


An independent Scotland has enormous economic potential to join other small European nations, especially as a leader in technology and renewable energy


Scotland has potential to be a leader in technology and renewable energy.


Small European nations would benefit from Scotland's economic potential.


Scotland has a proud history and has demonstrated since devolution different political interests


The union has worked for over three hundred years and most people feel comfortable with the joint Scots/British identity


Devolution has demonstrated the ability of Scots to govern themselves not only as well as Westminster but with more civility


Scots can govern themselves better than Westminster.


Devolution shows that Scots are more than capable to govern themselves.


Bribery is sometimes the cost of doing business


Bribery is occasionally a necessary price of engaging in business.


Sometimes bribery is a required cost of business


Bribery is morally wrong


Bribery can never be justified, as it is immoral.


There is no justification that can make bribery anything other than immoral.


The demand for bribes would end if companies stopped supplying them


Bribery is sometimes necessary for survival


In some circumstances, bribery is absolutely necessary.


Sometimes situations necessitate bribery.


Individuals may have no choice


Variation in standards leads to a ‘race to the bottom’ of corruptibility


Bribery is only wrong under a Western-centric notion of corruption


Bribery is not considered wrong in all cultures.


Libertarians would return society to a state of nature where ‘life is cruel, bloody and short’.


Libertarians want a world where everyone fends for themselves.


A libertarian world would be a crueler and darker world than the one we currently live in.


Libertarianism only works – even in theory – if you start off with a level pl


Libertarianism is really a coalition of the unwilling; the fringes of the left and right, happy to criticize but without a single policy on which they can agree


Libertarians have no policy ideas, but still want to be able to criticize others.


Libertarianism is a movement led by people who have no ideas on how to fix things, but criticize those that do.


[Iran specific] Iran has threatened to destroy Israel


Iran has Israel targeted.


No country has an inherent right to invade or use aggression against another.


The United States has an obligation to protect international stability due to its unique military strength.


The US must protect the international community.


The US military is needed to ensure peace.


[Iran specific] Others, particularly Israel, would act if the United States did not


If the US does not act on Iran, Israel will


Humanitarian intervention becomes impossible in states that possess nuclear weapons


Humanitarian missions would not be possible in states that have nuclear weapons.


It is very difficult to intercede in humanitarian crises in states wherein nuclear weapons are present.


The threat of a state developing nuclear weapons could instigate pre-emptive strikes from its neighbours and rivals to prevent the acquisition of such weapons


Other countries could strike against those developing nuclear weapons to protect themselves.


To keep other countries from obtaining a nuclear arsenal, other nations may pre-emptively strike.


The intention of a state to develop nuclear weapons may incite military attacks by enemies and by other supporting countries.


Public acknowledgement of the right to nuclear deterrence will benefit the public regulation of nuclear weapons generally


Nuclear weapons give states valuable agenda-setting power on the international stage


Countries with nuclear weapons have the ability to set their own agenda.


States with nuclear weapons are afforded more authority to set agendas at international levels.


All countries have a right to defend themselves with nuclear weapons, even when they lack the capacity in conventional weapons


All states have a right to nuclear self-defense.


To use  nuclear weapons in defense of the nation is lawful for all countries.


countries have to right to self defense with nuclear weapons, even when they lack capacity in conventional weapon


all countries are entitled to self defense with nuclear weapons, even when they do not have the capacity to carry conventional weapons


Possessing nuclear weapons will be counter to the peaceful interests of states


Nuclear waste disposal is rarely safe/efficient; it is too much to expect a sqeaky clean disposal/disarmament of nuclear weapons


Disarmament is impossible, rendering efforts to disarm pointless and simply wasteful


Disarmament would actually cause increased insecurity among nations, as there can never be any guarantee that a nation has disarmed


Disarmament would actually cause increased insecurity among nations, it is near impossible to guarantee that a nation has disarmed.


Disarmament would actually cause increased insecurity among nations, you can never really know for sure whether they have disarmed.


The abolition of nuclear weapons would actually incentivize the development and use of even more dangerous weapons, such as chemical and biological weapons


Proliferation of nuclear weapons increases the chances of nuclear accidents


Nuclear weapons can fall into the wrong hands.


The nukes can end up being used against us.


States will give terrorists nuclear weapons


It's conceivable that the wrong people will have the weapons.


Irrational leaders make the possession of nuclear weapons dangerous


It is immoral to use the threat of nuclear annihilation in order to achieve foreign policy aims


As a matter of principle, every country, including the United States, has the right to defend itself to the best of its technological and economic ability


Every country, including the United States, has a sovereign right to defend itself with every available means necessary


Every sovereign nation has the right to defend itself by all means necessary


Open primaries will lead to an intensification of lobbying activities


A result of open primaries will be increased activity in the lobbying.


Lobbyists will increase their activity if open primaries exist.


Open primaries will just make lobbying more prominent


Allowing open primaries will only encourage more lobbying


Increasing voter engagement


Voter engagement will be better.


More people participate.


Open primaries allow the electorate to express nuanced polling choices


Open primaries make it so that voters aren't locked into single party stance voting.


Open primaries will lead to an increase in disputes internal to political parties


Political parties will have more disputes with open primaries.


The primaries being open cause more internal friction.


With open primaries, there will be more conflict withing the parties


There will be more party infighting with open primaries


Open primaries will distract and confuse the majority of the electorate


Most people are confused by open primaries.


Open primaries are unnecessarily complex for most people.


Open primaries are open to manipulation


Open primaries can be manipulated.


It's possible to manipulate open primaries.


Open primaries promote engagement with political minorities


Political minorities are more engaged with open primaries.


If you want political minorities to be more engaged, open primaries can help with that.


Open primaries promote moderate, non-partisan politics


Moderate, non-partisan politics are promoted by open primaries.


Open primaries are beneficial for the nurturing of moderate, non-partisan politics.


Earmarks transfer too much power to political parties' central leadership


Earmarks allow the leaders of political parties to be too powerful.


Earmarks give the central leaders of political parties too much leverage.


Earmarks erode trust in the government


Earmarks contribute to a loss of confidence in the government.


Earmarks make people suspicious of the government.


Earmarks circumvent the normal legislative processes and erode confidence in government


McCain's Economic Adviser Says Earmarks Erode Public Trust


Earmarks do not accord with democratic principles of equity, fairness and justice


Earmarks are against our basic principles of fairness.


Earmarks aren't fair to everyone.


Abolishing earmarks will save money


Getting rid of earmarks will cut down on government waste.


Eliminating earmarks will help save tax dollars.


Should congressional earmarks be abolished?


Debate: Congressional Earmarks


Congressional earmarks are a check on an excessively powerful executive branch


Without congress to check the executive branch it could run wild.


Congress is one of the checks of the check and balance system that reins in the executive branch.


Earmarks do not represent an efficient use of taxpayers' money


Earmarks waste the taxpayer's money.


Earmarks aren't the best way to spend tax dollars.


Earmarks: The end of congressional pork?


Oversight , and Impact of Congressional Earmarks 2


Imposing a ban on earmarking will destabilise congrerss


Congress would be destabilised without earmarks.


A ban on earmarks would negatively affect congress.


Terrorism can bring attention


Terrorism is relative


Terrorism can lead to discussion


The longer a single leader remains in power, the more entrenched his grip becomes, and the more likely he is to use his office to his personal advantage.


Longer terms for Politicians could lead to unfairness in governing


If a single leader sits on the throne for too long, it's more likely for the leader to exploit his or her power.


The longer a politician remains in office, the more entrenched his grip becomes, and the more likely he is to use his office to his personal advantage:


If there's no term limit, the leader will likely exploit his power to personal advantages by staying too long in the office.


the longer someone is  in power, the more likely he will use it for personal advantage


as times went one, the more someone is in control of his power, the more likely he will succumb to use such power for personal advantage


By imposing mandatory term limits on politicians, we are saying the citizens are not capable of making good decisions about their elected officials.


Term limits are undemocratic and suggest, falsely, that voters cannot make intelligent decisions about their leaders on their own.


The use of term limits in politics shows a lack of faith in the ability of voters to choose the best candidate for office.


Term limits should be voted on


By having term limits, it makes voters feel that they can't decide on a leader by themselves


With term limits, voters are not seen as intelligent voters


Term limits are undemocratic and suggest, falsely, that voters cannot make intelligent decisions about their representatives without guidance:


congress needs term limits to ensure different points of views


term limits help with fresh ideas


Term limits allows new blood in the office and prevents one leader from staying in power for too long.


Term limits check the power of incumbency as an election-winning tool and allow new and energetic leaders and ideas to flourish.


term limits allow a balance check and allow for new fresh leaders to take position


it is our best interest to have term limits for diversity


Term limits create more competitive elections for public office that empower new leaders and ideas:


Having a new leader allow new ideas and thoughts in the office.


The incentive for corruption and self-enrichment in office is increased by term limits:


Term limits could lead one to be more dishonest to get the job done quicker


Having term limits on some leaders, puts too much power in the hands of non-limited officials.


When some leaders are subject to term limits and some are not, the balance of power in uneven.


With term limits, there is too much power given to those that aren't leaders


Term limits take too much power away from the leaders that were chosen


A strong, consistent executive may be desirable in many cases.


There are some circumstances when one would want a strong, consistent executive branch of government in place.


There are many instances when having a powerful, unlimited executive branch of government is best.


It may at some point be desirable to keep around a certain executive longer than terms decide


In some instances it may be better to not have term limits if there is a good leader at the time


Freeing the executive from re-election concerns can help focus attention on the public interest


The executive branch of government, having no countervailing voices to the leader s’ within it, must be checked by limiting tenancy in office.


By imposing a term limit in office, we can limit the power of executive branch of government.


The power of executive branch of government must be checked by having a term limit for the leader in the office.


there should be a tenancy for the executive branch of government as to keep in check the power of its leaders


the executives brances with no opposing voices to the leaders must be imposed term limits


Federal states are better able to protect their citizens.


Citizens are better protected in federal states.


Federal States often have persistent losers.


Losers abound in federal states.


Being a federal state helps large states deal with divergent economic performance


Federal United States are better off economically.


Federal governments often extend their powers and usurp local authority, especially if one or more federal units are disproportionately powerful.


Federal states are economically stronger


Having no elections is honest


Not having any elections is honest.


Refraining from elections is honest.


At least no elections would be more honest


Sham elections do not mean the elections have no influence or impact.


Just because an election is fake does not mean it will not have an impact.


Avoids the costs and uncertainty of elections


Doing so would limit the costs and uncertainty that come with others


It would mean there would be less costs spent on uncertainties


Even a sham election demonstrates what the people want


Fake elections are still a demonstration of the peoples desires.


The peoples desires will always be conveyed even in false elections.


Some kind of election is more likely to lead to real democracy than no election


Having elections is beneficial to the end result of democracy.


No elections are in direct contradiction to the desired effect of democracy.


Participation Is Good In Itself


Participatory Democracy Preserves our Natural Liberty


Participatory Democracy Produces Better Decisions


Participatory Democracy Facilitates the Misrepresentation of Issues


We cannot make any judgments about whose life is valuable and whose is not


Killing is worse than letting someone die


The act of killing is emotionally damaging


We instinctively know killing is wrong


We do not want a society in which killing can be acceptable


The threat of terrorism and security risks are overstated.


The loss of individual liberty is the start of a slippery slope.


Losing individual liberties leads to dangerous times.


The loss of individual freedoms is the beginning of dark times.


It would be letting the terrorists win


The terrorists would win in that case!


That is an open invitation for the terrorists.


National security is something that must be protected even at the cost of


The protection of national security is worth the loss of some civil liberties.


A coup makes it more difficult to trust in democracy


There could be reasons to start a coup against the government but that would not be good for democracy.


A military coup could be justified but it would make democracy fragile.


The army is not the best institution to run a country


Even if there is justification to launch a coup against the government, having the army ruling after that could be worse.


The army is not the best option to rule a country, therefore a military coup is not always the best option.


Eritrea is surrounded by hostile nations


Turkey does not have the freedoms associated with democracy


One party state


An Afghanistan dominated by warlords.


warlords hold control of afghanistans


The Taliban will likely take over when the NATO forces leave


the taliban will likely resume their control once nato forces leave


the taliban is waiting and likley to regain control of the region once nato forces leave


Negotiations to ensure lasting peace


lasting peace can be achieved through negotiation


negotiation can bring lasting peace


NATO has failed to solve Afghanistan’s economic problems


nato did not do well to solve afghanistan's economic problems


afghanistan economic issues are not solved by Nato


Afghanistan is still a dangerous place


Afghanistan is very dangerous


afghanistan is currently a dangerous place


Democracy has been brought to Afghanistan


NATO has brought peace and security


NATO has achieved peace in the region, allowing it to stabilize.


Peace and security has occurred thanks to NATO.


French interests


It is a humanitarian intervention


Because the turmoil besieged the state other parties took it upon themselves to lend a helping hand.


France was asked to intervene by Mali’s government


Fighting terrorism


Western countries should not be interfering in African internal affairs


Double jeopardy ensures defendants are not brought to trial on weak grounds


Defendants aren't brought to trial unnecessarily because of double jeopardy.


The double jeopardy principle ensures that only strong cases are brought against defendants.


Abolishment of double jeopardy would ensure the guilty do not escape punishment


Mandatory minimum sentencing can be designed to avoid injustices.


Mandatory sentencing gives prosecutors undue power.


Prosecutors have too much power under mandtory sentencing laws.


When there are mandatory sentences, too much power is in the hands of prosecutors.


Minimum mandatory sentences are unjust.


Minimum mandatory sentences are harmful.


Minimum mandatory sentences are unfair.


Minimum sentences increase the effectiveness of incapacitation.


Mandatory sentencing increases consistency in the justice system.


Everyone is treated the same when there is mandatory sentencing.


Mandatory sentencing ensures equal treatment.


Mandatory minimum sentences remove undue judicial discretion.


Mandatory minimum sentences make juries reluctant to convict guilty defendants.


Minimum mandatory sentences reduce the chance of rehabilitation.


Rehabilitation chances are harmed my minimum mandatory sentences.


The chance of rehabilitation is lower when minimum mandatory sentences are used.


Yanukovych committed crimes against humanity


Immoral crimes were committed by Yanukovych.


Yanukovych needs to go on trial for crimes against humanity.


Yanukovych crimes are against humanity.


Would prevent division


Does Yanukovych really qualify for the ICC?


Do you think Yanukovych qualifies for the ICC?


Should Yanukovych be tried at the ICC?


Could not be tried for all his crimes


Should be tried at home


Yanukovych should be tried at home.


Home is where Yanukovych should be tried.


As the ICC intentionally limits its prosecutions to group leaders, many of those who actually commit atrocities need have no fear of prosecution


The ICC’s investigations have already deterred potential crimes.


Investigations alone by the ICC deter crimes.


Investigations by the ICC deter potential criminals.


In the decade since its formation, the ICC has only one successful conviction


One conviction in 10 years doesn't deter anything.


The ICC lacks the power to ensure arrests


The ICC’s widely endorsed authority extends its deterrent effects.


The ICC's deterent effect is as wide as its authority is endorsed.


Potential prosecution by the ICC encourages local authorities to improve their own judicial systems.


Kenya can prosecute these crimes itself


Withdrawal from Article 98 agreements would hamper relations with the US


If the US withdraws from Article 98 other countries would not respect the US.


To maintain good US relations with the world we must follow Article 98.


Article 98 Agreements are unlikely to be needed


Article 98 Agreements are a crucial tool in maintaining American national sovereignty


National sovereignty is dependent on Article 98.


To have national sovereignty we must follow Article 98.


ICC enforcement would create resentment


If the ICC could do its own enforcement it would cause resentment.


An ICC enforcement arm would be quicker


An ICC enforcement arm is unnecessary


An ICC Enforcement arm would bring in a higher proportion of defendants in to trial


With ICC Enforcement we would have more violators brought to trial.


The number of defendants and ICC Enforcement are related.


An ICC enforcement arm would be highly detrimental to the relations between the ICC and state parties


The relations of the ICC and state parties would deteriorate if the ICC had its own enforcement arm.


The ICC would wind up clashing with state parties if it had a separate enforcement arm.


An ICC enforcement arm would be unduly expensive


It would be very expensive to implement an ICC enforcement arm.


The cost would be prohibitive to create an enforcement arm of the ICC.


An ICC enforcement arm would make the ICC more credible as an organization


Enforcement is important for others to value the ICC organization.


An ICC enforcement is a necessity if there is to be international criminal justice


We must have international criminal justice through ICC enforcement for good international relations.


ICC enforcement and international criminal justice are valuable to each other.


Creates the perception that the rich are not immune to the consequences of their actions


The rich are now also deterred


Creates the perception that fines are like taxes, rather than a punishment


A flat rate is more just


It is unfair to penalize a higher income with a larger fine.


Fines should be according to crime, not income.


The Schengen Area eases the free movement of goods and people that the EU strives for


Schengen tightens external borders, creating a ‘wall’ around Europe.


Schengen creates an invisible wall around Europe


As the Schengen area gets bigger, it becomes more difficult to police and this increases the risk of rogue elements being able to move freely between countries


It is difficult to monitor the area as it increases in size


There is currently too little supervision over the area because of its increase in size


The Schengen Agreement is both a symbol of and fundamental means of upholding the unity of the European Union


The Agreement helps to promote the stability of the European Union


The Agreement helps keep the European Union intact


Schengen has allowed cooperation in fighting global crime


Schengen helps countries work together to abolish crime


Schengen allows countries to aid each other in their quest to abolish crime on a global scale


The Schengen Agreement is an anachronism of a safer age.


The pursuit of pain for the purpose of achieving pleasure is an immoral act


Decriminalisation will protect practitioners of sadomasochism


Decriminalization will make SM play less dangerous, as people will be able to seek the proper authorities without consequence, if anything goes wrong.


Sadomasochistic practices should be legal between informed, consenting adults.


The criminalisation of sadomasochism infringes on individual liberty


It is not possible to meaningfully consent to sadomasochistic sex


The principle behind attorney-client privilege is declining in relevance


Attorney client privilege need not be sacrosanct in all situations


Sanctions are ineffective because they hurt ordinary people more than leadership.


Sanctions do not harm the right people.


Sanctions are ineffective because they can be counterproductive.


Sanctions cause more harm than good.


Sanctions can backfire.


The veto power was granted legally to the P5 by the other participating states, and therefore the P5 have a right to those powers.


It is appropriate for the veto power to remain in place.


The war is too expensive, so a deal needs to be made to end it.


The power sharing deal would stop a significant financial drain for the countries involved.


The Taliban failed to provide good government for Afghanistan.


We have successful precedents in Iraq and Africa, proving that a power-sharing approach works.


africa and iraq are proof that power sharing works.


the power sharing aproach has been proven successful by irag and africa


Afghan history shows failings of foreign invasion, so this campaign is also doomed to failure.


The Taliban supports terrorist organizations, so they are not to be trusted.


you can not trust the taliban because of their support of terrorist groups.


The Taliban is a cruel and undemocratic regime, and so it should not be given any power.


the taliban should not be given power.


The campaign is unpopular among the majority of NATO countries citizens, so we should solve the Afghan problem in diplomatic way, specifically through a power-sharing deal with the Taliban.


NATO countries have citizens who are weary of the war so they would welcome such a power sharing settlemetn.


The concept of federalism lacks political support


The federal model has proved to be a success previously


Previous federal models have proven to be successful


A federal Europe will protect the cultural diversity of its member states


Protection of cultural diversity is one benefit of a federal Europe.


Existing contributive inequalities within the Union would be amplified by a formal federal system


Formal federalism creates extra inequalities.


A federal Europe will benefit the citizens of its member states


Citizens will benefit from a federal Europe.


Member states will reap the benefits of a federal Europe.


A federal Europe will be a stronger international actor


Europe is stronger if federal.


If Europe went federal, they would have a larger international impact


A federal Europe will ensure that large, multinational businesses remain accountable for their actions


Federalism holds massive corporations accountable.


Moves toward federalism will endanger the stability of the EU


Every nation should be allowed to respect its war dead


every nation has a right to their dead war heroes


Honouring war criminals is wrong


War criminals should not be honored, even after they're dead.


Visits sour relations


Social stability through the use of dictatorships.


Dictatorships can prevent social unrest


Society is put at ease when everyone is as equally under the thumb of the dictator as everyone else.


Dictatorship helps achieve social stability


Democracy acts in the interest of the general population, which is good for development


Dictatorships assure low cost political stability


Dictatorships offer political stability by eliminating competition.


Development occurs when a dictatorship revert into democracy


Democratic rule of law is the best ground for political stability and growth


Democracy lets a country grow naturaly


Dictatorship outperforms democracy in growth and economic develpment


The loger lasting and biggest economic miracles  have ocurred under dictatorships


Democracies can't mobilize a country as fast as a dictatorship can.


In order to develop quickly, a dictator must be in power to sped things up.


A dictatorship breeds order and it's a needed step for both development and liberal democracy


Dictatorships breed development and liberal democracy.


Breeding of development and liberal democracy under dictatorial rule.


Dictatorships have a flexibility in economic policy that breeds growth


Dictators have incentives to promote development and diminish social differences


Dictator’s decisions undermines the people and are unaccountable


Dictatorships regimes can be a path for countries move on from civil wars and focus on development


Dictatorial regimes can move countries from civil wars toward development.


Dictatorship is a threat to diversity and multi ethnicity


Imposing dictatorship will be a threat to diversity and multi ethnicity.


Dictatorship will stop all path of development in a democratic country


Dictatorships better control the variables of human development


Dictatorship brings profit to dictators and its clique, but not to the citizens


Dictatorships breed development though efficient and straighfoward decision making


Dictatorship is a good breeding ground for personal discipline and order


Dictatorships are more effective than democracies at mobilizing resources for investment.


Democracies are more likely to be economically successful


Democracies do better at meeting economic needs.


People's needs are met best in democracies.


Human development indicators have significantly improved in recent years.


Africa’s Economies are growing rapidly


Majority of states are still undemocratic


Greater Access to Technology


The Continent is still vulnerable to natural disasters


Foreign Direct Investment to the continent has increased


Expansion would be unpopular.


Enlarging the EU could cause controversy.


Is the unpopularity of EU expansion worth its further enlargement?


The European Union is no longer in a financial position to be taking in new members.


Enlarging the EU could potentially cause financial problems for all involved.


Possible financial instability does not warrant the EU accepting new members.


There will be an even greater brain drain from poorer countries to richer.


Adding poorer countries to the EU will adversely impact the ones that  are more prosperous.


Richer countries will not benefit from adding poorer countries to the EU.


Expansion furthers EU ideals.


As the EU expands, so does it's ideals.


The ideals of the EU have greater reach if the union expands.


Expansion will create conflicts of interest between members.


EU expansion could wreak havoc between its members.


Enlarging the EU will have a more negative impact between its members.


EU expansion is right.


It is proper that the EU continues to expand.


It is the right thing for the EU to expand.


EU expansion is good for current members politically.


From a political standpoint, it is to the EU's member's benefit to continue to expand.


The EU should continue to expand for the benefit of its members.


EU expansion is good for current members economically.


Economic gains can be seen for EU members when the union continues to expand.


EU expansion is positive for the economic health of its members.


Returning to the 1967 borders would bring peace to Israel.


Establishing the borders as they were  prior to 1967 would cease violence in Israel.


Israel will be peaceful if its borders were changed as they were before 1967.


International law supports dividing Jerusalem


Dividing Jerusalem would harm Israeli society:


Division would do more harm than good.


Unfavorable societal outcomes from division mean that it is not worth it.


Offshoring exploits both individual workers and under developed states.


There are multiple negative effects of offshoring.


Underdeveloped states and workers are harmed by this practice.


Offshore outsourcing is consistent with existing labour distribution patterns.


Outsourcing follows the current labor distribution model.


Offshore outsourcing reduces living standards and limits social mobility.


Social mobility is negatively impacted by offshore outsourcing.


Living standards decline and is just one example of the cons of offshore outsourcing.


Sanctions are necessary for national security


The national well-being is best served by the continuation of economic sanctions against Cuba


Cuba deserves sanctions


Economic punishment is what Cuba should be subject to


The actions of the Cuban government have merited the Cuban government economic penalty


The people of Cuba are the victims of the embargo, opposed the intended target of the government.


Cuban citizens are paying the price for their government's actions.


The casualties of the embargo are the civilians of Cuba, not the government as ideal.


The embargo harms the people of Cuba, not the government as intended.


Sanctions harm the Cuban people.


Economic benefits of ending sanctions


If sanctions were lifted trade benefits would flow to all parties to trade.


Sanctions are not working


The Cuban government is unaffected by the sanctions.


Where the people and not the government shoulder the burden, sanctions don't work.


The United States should end the Cuba embargo because its 50-year policy has failed to achieve its goals.


After 50 years the Cuba embargo has shown no results so the US should end it.


The Cuba embargo has failed to achieve its goal after 50 years so the US should end it.


The embargo enables the United States to apply pressure on the Cuban government to improve human rights.


The United States should not have different trading and travel policies for Cuba than for other countries with governments or policies it opposes.


The embargo prevents the people of Cuba from joining the digital age by cutting them off from technology, and restricts the electronic flow of information to the island.


Cubans can't join the digital era while under embargo due to lack of electronic access.


The United States should maintain the Cuba embargo because Cuba has not met the conditions required to lift it.


Ending the embargo before the Cuban government meets the conditions specified by US law would make the United States look weak.


The embargo is a relic of Cold War Era thinking and is unnecessary because Cuba does not pose a threat to the United States.


The Cuba embargo is a product of Cold War Era mentality thus obsolete for Cuba is not a threat to the US.


Cuba should be subject to sanctions because it is known to have repeatedly supported acts of terrorism.


Cuba is knows to sponsor terrorism so sanctions are appropriate.


Because Cuba supports terrorism, it should have sanctions levvied against it.


The United States is able to target the Cuban government with its embargo while still providing assistance to Cuban citizens.


The embargo should be maintained because open travel is insufficient to promote change in Cuba; many democratic countries already allow travel to Cuba with no results.


The embargo must be upheld as others have allowed open travel with no results.


Open travel to Cuba has not yielded change so the embargo should continue.


Lifting the embargo would put pressure on Cuba to address problems that it had previously blamed on US sanctions.


Most of the world opposes the embargo, and maintaining it is detrimental to the reputation of the United States among the international community.


Maintaining a widely-reviled embargo damages the US's diplomatic reputation.


The global community opposes the embargo, and maintaining it hurts the US diplomatically.


The Cuban government has consistently responded to US attempts to soften the embargo with acts of aggression, raising concerns about what would happen if the sanctions were fully lifted.


Free trade, not the isolation of an embargo, can promote democracy in Cuba.


Free trade in lieu of embargo can promote Cuban democracy.


Instead of embargo, free trade will promote democracy in Cuba.


The uncertainty over who will succeed Raúl Castro makes it unwise for the United States to change its policy before a new leader is in place.


There is no definitive replacement for Raul Castro, which makes it unwise for the US to implement new policies at this time.


Until the US knows who will replace Raul Castro, it does not make sense to put new policies in place.


Cuba has not demonstrated a willingness to negotiate in good faith with the United States.


Cuba seems unwilling to negotiate with the US.


Cuba seems reluctant to genuinely engage with the US.


The US is not a hegemon at all, but an imperialist power-an empire.


The United States is a de facto empire.


In reality, the United States is an empire, not a hegemon.


The US is less of a hegemon and more of an imperial empire


The US is more like an imperial power and less like a hegemon


Family planning is wrong: controlling sexuality


Controlling sexuality in family planning is wrong


Sexuality and family planning don't mix


Involving men is the best way to ensure family planning works


Men's involvement in family planning is the most important aspect


Family planning needs the input of men to be successful


Only an international treaty can create penalties for non-compliance


Penalties for non-compliance are restricted to international treaties


An international treaty will legalize non-compliance penalties


Only a non-binding agreement would get the targets necessary


Sovereign states should be allowed to set their own targets and be trusted to meet them


Meeting emission targets should be set by individual states


Allowing sovereign states to set and meet their own emission targets is key


People may have valid religious reasons not to donate organs


A Practical Solution


What if your loved-one was a recipient?


What if a doctor decides to 'let you go' to get an organ?


Food labeling allows companies to deceive consumers


By labeling their foods, companies are able to convince consumers of falsehoods.


Consumers can be fed lies by companies via food labels.


Food labeling encourages food companies to provide food more in tune with consumer values


When made to label foods, food companies generally offer foods that match consumer values.


When companies label their foods, consumers have an easier time finding foods that help them meet their goals.


Food labeling does not change consumer behavior


Consumers do not change their buying habits based on the absence or presence of labels.


Food labeling is an important form of consumer protection


In order to protect consumers, it is important to correctly label food products.


When foods go unlabeled, consumers lack a vital form of protection.


Food labeling helps people make better choices regarding their food


It is easier for people to make healthier food choices when foods are labeled.


In order to make healthy food choices, it is important that foods are labeled.


Food labeling introduces unfair prejudice against certain products


Food labels encourage bias against certain types of products.


Nutrition labeling on packages can encourage consumers to buy certain types of foods over others.


Banning alcohol protects third parties (family members) from harm.


We should BAN Alcohol for our families


Banning alcohol would lead to healthier individuals.


Alcohol should be banned so that our individuals would lead healthier lives.


Banning Alcohol will improve health


An alcohol ban would be good for society


Banning alcohol is a quick fix to a wider societal problem.


Encouraging film entrepreneurs


Development from within


By developing from withing their community, perception could improve


Building from withing could improve perceptions from outsiders


Epitomising rising Africa


Money is intrinsic to political speech.


Money stifles, it does not advance debate.


We must retain a respect for academia


University education gives people something to aim for


Universities don’t have unlimited places available


College graduates are more productive as members of society.


An increase of graduates from college is beneficial to those in society who never attend college.


Many people succeed without college degrees.


Some argue that a college education may not be necessary, since there are many people who have succeeded despite not having college degrees.


The question of whether or not a college education is necessary for success is one that is debated, as many successful people are not college educated.


Many college graduates are employed in jobs that do not require college degrees.


Many people with college degrees find themselves working in positions in which their degrees are not a requirement.


More and more college educated people are accepting jobs for which they do not need a college education.


College exposes students to diverse people and ideas.


One of the benefits of a college education is the exposure it provides to a multitude of people and ideas.


College exposes students to a wide  range of experiences and world perspectives.


College graduates are more likely to have health insurance and retirement plans.


Those who graduate from college are more likely to have retirement plans and health insurance.


Graduating from college increases the likelihood of having health insurance and a retirement plan.


Colleges may be indoctrinating students instead of educating them.


Colleges may be brainwashing their students rather than helping them further their education.