Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Lets debate

megmeg Posts: 2President

Does technology make us feel more alone?
Is a college education worth it?
Should the words "under God" be in the US Pledge of Allegiance?
Is there good reason for the American war on terror?

feel free to add your own

Comments

  • CarmenCarmen Posts: 53President

    Technology unites us meg, I strongly disagree that it makes us feel more alone. I was a nobody until I reached out to similar people to me on the web. College education can be worth it if you're sincerely invested in something, and not just doing it because you "have to" or because of the potential money. Those words shouldn't be in the pledge IMO, there's no reason to bring religion into state matters - unless you want a theocracy, which can actually be legit. And no, there's no reason we need to finish fights that were never ours.

    Hope this helps meg!!

  • WeebDestroyerWeebDestroyer Posts: 1Member

    Technology does not make us feel more alone, but it could make us be colder to other people and the world. One example is weebs, who obsess over Japanese culture, and by doing this, don't stop and think of the real world around them.

    College education is worth it it is right for you. Some people should go to college, some people should go to trade school, and some should take other paths. Everyone is different. But I think it is built in the mind to a lot of people to get a bachelor degree, when trade school or other paths are equally, or sometimes better, solutions.

    Many foreigners like to comment on the USA, but they do not understand the history and situation of the country. The founding fathers believed God was not the Christian God or Muslim God, or any God of a religious sect, like Carmen says above. They believed there was a higher power, for all things, and called this power God. Therefore, the God in the Pledge of Allegiance does not violate the separation of church and state, because this "God" doesn't belong to any religion. This "God" is more along the lines of Mother Nature, as the Founding Fathers believed, we have NATURAL rights, not divine ones. So I think it is perfectly fine to say the words "Under God".

    Well, 9/11 happened. If someone attacks your country, I think attacking back is an OK response. I agree with Carmen we should try not and fight fights that are not ours, but the world is complicated. Countries tried to do that before WW2, and Hitler rose unopposed. It is a similar thing we see today. We are in the Middle East to control the terrorist that have risen, but also, and more importantly, we are there because it is a proxy war against Iran and Russia. For the first part about controlling terrosism, I do not agree with how we are handling it, although the right decision is complicated, as always. We have been there for over 15 years, and it is pretty much the same, so we either have to increase the amount of troops or withdraw altogether. If we increase, Russia and Iran will be very angry, if we withdraw, the veterans who fought there would feel like they fought for nothing, and would be very angry. Also, land would fall under the control of more terrorist groups, and the people there would become oppressed. As for the proxy war, it is important. Russia aka Putin, is very aggressive. The USA is the only country able to stand up to it, that is why we are all over the Middle East and all over Europe. Other countries love to bash on the USA and being "imperialists", but they are bashing the people protecting their countries from Russia and China. So as you see, our involvement in the world is necessary, or else you will be speaking Russian or Chinese.

  • CarmenCarmen Posts: 53President
    edited May 15

    image

    test

  • CheatCheat Posts: 2President

    @meg said:
    Does technology make us feel more alone?
    Is a college education worth it?
    Should the words "under God" be in the US Pledge of Allegiance?
    Is there good reason for the American war on terror?

    feel free to add your own

    IDK.
    No.
    Fuck. No.
    Profits, mang.

  • Winona_RyderWinona_Ryder Posts: 2Member
    1. Highly likely
    2. Obviously depends on many factors
    3. Who cares
    4. Obviously
  • LesbianPirateLesbianPirate Posts: 12Director
    edited May 16

    1 technology is not responsible for the sense of disconnect and isolation newer generations are feeling to their every day lives. we should question why the newer generations are trying to escape reality, not how

    2 it would be if it didnt come with the crippling financial debt

    3 no separate government and religion entirely

    4 this is a question you would write an english essay on

  • blackRachelDolezalblackRachelDolezal Posts: 2Member
    1. The Industrial Revolution and its consequences have
      been a disaster for the human race. They have greatly
      increased the life-expectancy of those of us who live in
      “advanced” countries, but they have destabilized society,
      have made life unfulfilling, have subjected human beings
      to indignities, have led to widespread psychological suffering
      (in the Third World to physical suffering as well) and
      have inflicted severe damage on the natural world. The
      continued development of technology will worsen the situation.
      It will certainly subject human being to greater indignities
      and inflict greater damage on the natural world,
      it will probably lead to greater social disruption and psychological
      suffering, and it may lead to increased physical
      suffering even in “advanced” countries.
      The industrial-technological system may survive or it
      may break down. If it survives, it MAY eventually achieve
      a low level of physical and psychological suffering, but
      only after passing through a long and very painful period
      of adjustment and only at the cost of permanently reducing
      human beings and many other living organisms to
      engineered products and mere cogs in the social machine.
      Furthermore, if the system survives, the consequences will
      be inevitable: There is no way of reforming or modifying
      the system so as to prevent it from depriving people of
      dignity and autonomy.
      If the system breaks down the consequences will still
      be very painful. But the bigger the system grows the more
      disastrous the results of its breakdown will be, so if it is
      to break down it had best break down sooner rather than
      later.
      We therefore advocate a revolution against the industrial
      system. This revolution may or may not make use
      of violence; it may be sudden or it may be a relatively
      gradual process spanning a few decades. We can’t predict
      any of that. But we do outline in a very general way the
      measures that those who hate the industrial system should
      take in order to prepare the way for a revolution against
      that form of society. This is not to be a POLITICAL revolution.
      Its object will be to overthrow not governments
      but the economic and technological basis of the present
      society.
      In this article we give attention to only some of
      the negative developments that have grown out of the
      industrial-technological system. Other such developments
      we mention only briefly or ignore altogether. This does not
      mean that we regard these other developments as unimportant.
      For practical reasons we have to confine our discussion
      to areas that have received insufficient public attention
      or in which we have something new to say. For
      example, since there are well-developed environmental
      and wilderness movements, we have written very little
      about environmental degradation or the destruction of
      wild nature, even though we consider these to be highly
      important.
Sign In or Register to comment.