It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Head-2-Head: Are Homeless Individuals A Victim of Their Own Wrongdoing?
page: 17
share:
chissler and semperfortis have agreed to take on the second Head-2-Head challenge.
Topic: Are Homeless Individuals A Victim of Their Own Wrongdoing?
Pro: semperfortis
Con: chissler
Terms
1. Participants will take turns, and each will post an opening statement, two rebuttals and a closing statement.
2. There are no time limits on this debate.
3. Opening and closing statements will be no longer than 5000 characters, and rebuttals will be no longer than 7500 characters. Quotes of the other participant's posts will not count toward the totals.
4. The debate will be judged by an anonymous member of the staff. Majic will serve as an intermediary and post the verdict after the debate has concluded.
5. The General H2H Debate Rules apply.
6. semperfortis will post first, at which time the debate will begin.
Participation
These are the proposed terms for this debate. Participants should ensure that they understand and agree to them prior to posting to this thread.
Once a post has been made, the terms are binding.
If either participant requires a change in terms, please contact me via U2U. Otherwise...
Fight well, and let the debate begin!
Topic: Are Homeless Individuals A Victim of Their Own Wrongdoing?
Pro: semperfortis
Con: chissler
Terms
1. Participants will take turns, and each will post an opening statement, two rebuttals and a closing statement.
2. There are no time limits on this debate.
3. Opening and closing statements will be no longer than 5000 characters, and rebuttals will be no longer than 7500 characters. Quotes of the other participant's posts will not count toward the totals.
4. The debate will be judged by an anonymous member of the staff. Majic will serve as an intermediary and post the verdict after the debate has concluded.
5. The General H2H Debate Rules apply.
6. semperfortis will post first, at which time the debate will begin.
Participation
These are the proposed terms for this debate. Participants should ensure that they understand and agree to them prior to posting to this thread.
Once a post has been made, the terms are binding.
If either participant requires a change in terms, please contact me via U2U. Otherwise...
Fight well, and let the debate begin!
Are the Homeless victim’s?
The Homeless are predominantly the victim’s only of their own actions and as such must be required to change their specific circumstances in the same manner in which they found themselves there in the first place. By making decisions to again become a productive member of society.
Let me initially state that I am not going to address those individuals that are homeless due to a mental illness of any sort. I am specifically referring to those individuals that leave a perfectly productive or potentially productive life for various reasons and abandon their homes and family and live in the “Underground Society” of the Homeless culture.
Currently society wishes to relegate a significant portion of our society to victim status all because they have given up. Given up on themselves, society, their families, whatever is the case; they have given up. Life is a struggle, whether we struggle for our next dollar to pay the rent, or struggle to make the house payment on our million dollar mansion. It is still a struggle. When things get tough, do you just give up and run off hiding from your responsibilities, or face them and struggle back into the game?
The Liberals want us to believe that it is not our fault if we give up; that the government should step in and take care of our poor little selves. I mean that is what we pay taxes for isn’t it. NO.. It is not the Government’s place to “take care” of anyone individual. Our representative Republic was not founded on a Socialist concept and that must be avoided at all costs.
Definitions :
Socialist : a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
3. (In Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
So using the definition listed, we can see where allowing, even enabling the Government to “take care” of us, will eventually lead us.
With that being said the responsibilities of the individual for their own actions, their own welfare and well being are paramount. When we assign victim status to those that do not wish to care for themselves, we are enabling an entire culture of individual’s that will forever subsist on the backs of the people instead of supporting and providing for themselves.
So my basic premise is to enable the Homeless, to call them victims is to forfeit the very foundations this country was founded on.
Individual Factors
On an individual level, homelessness is frequently the result of a crisis in someone's life. There is a range of events or crisis points that can trigger homelessness, identified by Fitzpatrick and Klinker (2000) as being:
• Leaving the parental home after arguments
• Marital or relationship breakdown
• Widowhood
• Leaving care
• Leaving prison
• A sharp deterioration of mental health
• Increased drug or alcohol misuse
• A financial crisis or mounting debts
• Eviction
Now look at the reasons listed here for frequent causes of homelessness. Ruling out the only two that are not “self” created, Widowhood and Mental Health, the rest are simply the results of the actions of individuals. How can those actions automatically thrust one into being a victim? How can leaving the home because of an argument create a victim? Breaking up with your spouse? Committing a crime? Using drugs? Not paying your bills?
“The result of a crisis”; now that is a broad definition as well. We have all had a crisis, every single one of us and yet most manage to remain in a productive environment and do not end up living on the street. Do not begin looking for the government to feed and clothe us, give us housing and money. We mange our crisis and work hard and finally get back on our feet.
So there is evidence that the homeless can and do often take care of themselves without the Government stepping in and supporting them.
VICTIM : a person who suffers from a destructive or injurious action or agency:
1. a victim of an automobile accident.
2. a person who is deceived or cheated, as by his or her own emotions or ignorance, by the dishonesty of others, or by some impersonal agency: a victim of misplaced confidence; the victim of a swindler; a victim of an optical illusion.
dictionary.reference.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> dictionary.reference.com...
The Homeless are predominantly the victim’s only of their own actions and as such must be required to change their specific circumstances in the same manner in which they found themselves there in the first place. By making decisions to again become a productive member of society.
Let me initially state that I am not going to address those individuals that are homeless due to a mental illness of any sort. I am specifically referring to those individuals that leave a perfectly productive or potentially productive life for various reasons and abandon their homes and family and live in the “Underground Society” of the Homeless culture.
Currently society wishes to relegate a significant portion of our society to victim status all because they have given up. Given up on themselves, society, their families, whatever is the case; they have given up. Life is a struggle, whether we struggle for our next dollar to pay the rent, or struggle to make the house payment on our million dollar mansion. It is still a struggle. When things get tough, do you just give up and run off hiding from your responsibilities, or face them and struggle back into the game?
The Liberals want us to believe that it is not our fault if we give up; that the government should step in and take care of our poor little selves. I mean that is what we pay taxes for isn’t it. NO.. It is not the Government’s place to “take care” of anyone individual. Our representative Republic was not founded on a Socialist concept and that must be avoided at all costs.
Definitions :
Socialist : a theory or system of social organization that advocates the vesting of the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution, of capital, land, etc., in the community as a whole.
3. (In Marxist theory) the stage following capitalism in the transition of a society to communism, characterized by the imperfect implementation of collectivist principles.
So using the definition listed, we can see where allowing, even enabling the Government to “take care” of us, will eventually lead us.
With that being said the responsibilities of the individual for their own actions, their own welfare and well being are paramount. When we assign victim status to those that do not wish to care for themselves, we are enabling an entire culture of individual’s that will forever subsist on the backs of the people instead of supporting and providing for themselves.
So my basic premise is to enable the Homeless, to call them victims is to forfeit the very foundations this country was founded on.
Individual Factors
On an individual level, homelessness is frequently the result of a crisis in someone's life. There is a range of events or crisis points that can trigger homelessness, identified by Fitzpatrick and Klinker (2000) as being:
• Leaving the parental home after arguments
• Marital or relationship breakdown
• Widowhood
• Leaving care
• Leaving prison
• A sharp deterioration of mental health
• Increased drug or alcohol misuse
• A financial crisis or mounting debts
• Eviction
Now look at the reasons listed here for frequent causes of homelessness. Ruling out the only two that are not “self” created, Widowhood and Mental Health, the rest are simply the results of the actions of individuals. How can those actions automatically thrust one into being a victim? How can leaving the home because of an argument create a victim? Breaking up with your spouse? Committing a crime? Using drugs? Not paying your bills?
“The result of a crisis”; now that is a broad definition as well. We have all had a crisis, every single one of us and yet most manage to remain in a productive environment and do not end up living on the street. Do not begin looking for the government to feed and clothe us, give us housing and money. We mange our crisis and work hard and finally get back on our feet.
Most individuals do not stay homeless for long. The majority of people who are homeless are working. They save up money, find inexpensive housing, share an apartment with a friend, or find another solution within two months to two years. There are many successful programs for helping those people with more extensive problems to become stable and self-sufficient.
www.anitra.net..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.anitra.net...
So there is evidence that the homeless can and do often take care of themselves without the Government stepping in and supporting them.
Hats off to my opponent, who appears to be ready to do battle, and those in charge for making this happen. Lets Go...
"Are Homeless Individuals A Victim Of Their Own Wrongdoing?"
This is the topic we have at hand, and it is one that society likes to paint with one brush. Unfortunately, like anything else in life, this painting requires more than one brush as every individual has their own story. To say that homeless individuals are in their current state, due to a personal decision, is a naive one. My opponent basis his opening post on the premise that these individuals "prefer" to be out on the street with nowhere to go. As that may be the case for a small percentage of the population, ultimately, we can not say that for everyone. With that in mind, it is quite clear that our direction needs to be pointed towards the majority of homeless individuals.
At this point, I would like to acknowledge the true "crux" of this issue, Society. Homeless people do not "choose" to be homeless, just as drug addicts do not "choose" to be drug addicts.
I will touch on an issue that is close to my heart, but delve into it much deeper later in the debate, Addictive behaviours. Now my opponent has already stated that this is a personal choice the individual has to make, and nobody is to blame but themselves. We are all familiar with cancer, but are we all familiar with Oxycodone?
This solution has become more of a problem than anything in the last five years. Cancer survivors were prescribed this drug in very large doses and given little warning to the extent of damage it could cause. It was hyped up as a savior, but it was clearly something else. Individuals on this drug became quickly addicted, a addiction that easily compares to a Crystal Meth addiction. Now are we to believe there is a moment we can pinpoint when this treatment becomes an addiction? How? Doctors handed out these pills to cancer patients who were doctors, lawyers, politicians, pharmacists, teachers, principles, etc., and they all found themselves addicted just like anyone else.
Crime rate in our area spiked, and it was shocking to find out who was committing the crimes. All of the sudden the homeless individuals we were coming about, were the cancer patients we were just mourning, and the people who once taught our children.
Now I ask you, was this their choice? Was this a personal decision made by those who consumed the drug?
This is one example, of many to come, of how homeless individuals are not making the choice on their economical status. Are we to believe that people would prefer to sleep out on the sidewalk during the middle of a snowstorm? This is the choice they have made, over paying bills or dealing with family members?
A rather large assumption, backed up with little fact.
It also must be said that political agenda's are not the topic at hand. Faulting administrations for a motion that disagrees with survival of the fittest is off topic, and in my opinion, a ploy to confuse the public to the true intent of this debate.
I wish to make it clear that I do not believe we are a spectator in the life we live, but it should be clear that we can be manipulated by the society to which we inhabit. If we make a decision, but the basis of our decision was manipulated, then did we actually make the decision? Or has society made that decision for us?
My opponent has clearly laid out a very strong list explaining why the Homeless are actually to blame for their current situation. But I think the true list would look more like this:
■ Poverty
■ Serious Mental Illness
■ Disabilities
■ Foster Care Children
■ Victims of Domestic Abuse
■ Civilians During War
■ War Veterans
■ Genocide Survivors
Are we to believe that these individuals chose to live on the streets? Are we to believe that our society has a history of greeting our soldiers with open arms? ...Vietnam? Genocide? Darfur? Was this their decision? Spousal Abuse? When a spouse has no decision but to run, was this their decision or a decision made by the abuser? Poverty? Did a child in poverty decide to be born into the poverty they inhabit?
The answer to all of these questions is No! Society has made this decision for them, they are merely forced to make the best of their current situation.
I turn the floor back over to my opponent. It appears I am in tough on this one.
(5000)
"Are Homeless Individuals A Victim Of Their Own Wrongdoing?"
This is the topic we have at hand, and it is one that society likes to paint with one brush. Unfortunately, like anything else in life, this painting requires more than one brush as every individual has their own story. To say that homeless individuals are in their current state, due to a personal decision, is a naive one. My opponent basis his opening post on the premise that these individuals "prefer" to be out on the street with nowhere to go. As that may be the case for a small percentage of the population, ultimately, we can not say that for everyone. With that in mind, it is quite clear that our direction needs to be pointed towards the majority of homeless individuals.
At this point, I would like to acknowledge the true "crux" of this issue, Society. Homeless people do not "choose" to be homeless, just as drug addicts do not "choose" to be drug addicts.
I will touch on an issue that is close to my heart, but delve into it much deeper later in the debate, Addictive behaviours. Now my opponent has already stated that this is a personal choice the individual has to make, and nobody is to blame but themselves. We are all familiar with cancer, but are we all familiar with Oxycodone?
Oxycodone is one of the most powerful medications for pain control that can be taken orally. Percocet tablets (Oxycodone with acetaminophen) are routinely prescribed for post-operative pain control. Oxycodone is also used in treatment of moderate to severe chronic pain. When used at recommended doses for relatively short periods (several weeks), it provides effective pain control with manageable side effects. Both immediate release oxycodone and sustained-release OxyContin are prescribed for pain due to cancer more than for any other condition.
This solution has become more of a problem than anything in the last five years. Cancer survivors were prescribed this drug in very large doses and given little warning to the extent of damage it could cause. It was hyped up as a savior, but it was clearly something else. Individuals on this drug became quickly addicted, a addiction that easily compares to a Crystal Meth addiction. Now are we to believe there is a moment we can pinpoint when this treatment becomes an addiction? How? Doctors handed out these pills to cancer patients who were doctors, lawyers, politicians, pharmacists, teachers, principles, etc., and they all found themselves addicted just like anyone else.
Crime rate in our area spiked, and it was shocking to find out who was committing the crimes. All of the sudden the homeless individuals we were coming about, were the cancer patients we were just mourning, and the people who once taught our children.
Now I ask you, was this their choice? Was this a personal decision made by those who consumed the drug?
This is one example, of many to come, of how homeless individuals are not making the choice on their economical status. Are we to believe that people would prefer to sleep out on the sidewalk during the middle of a snowstorm? This is the choice they have made, over paying bills or dealing with family members?
A rather large assumption, backed up with little fact.
It also must be said that political agenda's are not the topic at hand. Faulting administrations for a motion that disagrees with survival of the fittest is off topic, and in my opinion, a ploy to confuse the public to the true intent of this debate.
I wish to make it clear that I do not believe we are a spectator in the life we live, but it should be clear that we can be manipulated by the society to which we inhabit. If we make a decision, but the basis of our decision was manipulated, then did we actually make the decision? Or has society made that decision for us?
My opponent has clearly laid out a very strong list explaining why the Homeless are actually to blame for their current situation. But I think the true list would look more like this:
■ Poverty
■ Serious Mental Illness
■ Disabilities
■ Foster Care Children
■ Victims of Domestic Abuse
■ Civilians During War
■ War Veterans
■ Genocide Survivors
Are we to believe that these individuals chose to live on the streets? Are we to believe that our society has a history of greeting our soldiers with open arms? ...Vietnam? Genocide? Darfur? Was this their decision? Spousal Abuse? When a spouse has no decision but to run, was this their decision or a decision made by the abuser? Poverty? Did a child in poverty decide to be born into the poverty they inhabit?
The answer to all of these questions is No! Society has made this decision for them, they are merely forced to make the best of their current situation.
I turn the floor back over to my opponent. It appears I am in tough on this one.
(5000)
Semper’s Rebuttal
On the contrary, my position is clear in that they made choices that placed them into a homeless situation. Not that they prefer to be homeless. THEY decided to leave their family because their Daddy was too strict, THEY decided to pick up the Crack Pipe, THEY decided to not put the bottle down, THEY decided to quit their job, or not work two jobs and lost everything.
Bad decisions? Yes, but decisions no less.
Wrong. Drug Addicts choose to use drugs. With the obvious extremely rare exception of being tied down and having the drugs forced into your system, the individual chooses to use that drug and to continue using it without concern for the effects; that is until some Liberal Government official comes along and tells them that the Government will support them because they are not strong enough, or willing enough to put the pipe down. Addiction is horrible, but not unbeatable. I know this from personal experience.
Well almost..
Granted there is going to be some overlap in reference to those individuals that do not have the self-control or will power to follow the doctor’s orders, but several Google searches will reveal that the majority are simply drug abusers.
Key word, abuse.
Again, Choices.
No, they choose to sleep on the side walks during the day in the warm summer and roam the streets at night. Then when big bad winter hits, they are all of a sudden relegated into “those poor people”, never taking into consideration the choices they made to get them there. If they are forever inserted into our society as victims, those choices will never be considered and we will begin a campaign of the Government caring for people instead of people supporting the government. Remember, Socialism is the failed experiment.
AH, but it is political my friend. It is as simple as the difference between the strong Conservative values that built this Country, and Liberal values that wish us to be a socialist society. Putting off the Homeless as being non-political is in and of itself a distraction from the true issues surrounding officially naming Homeless victims.
That is.
Giving them certain status as a Governmental supported group that needs to take no responsibility for their own actions. Call then victims all you want as long as it is understood they are the victims of their own poor judgment, not the victims of a society that has and presents every possible advantage for those that are willing to get up in the morning and go out and make a life. Not just to give up and expect the rest of us that are willing to get up and go to work, to support you.
What are you going to do if the majority of society decides to play the victim and become Homeless? What happens when there are no longer any citizens to flip the burgers? Make the bolts and microwaves? What then? Who is going to support an entire country of homeless victims? Sound outrageous? Sure it does, but what if we all just stopped and expected the Government to support us? Why even get up except to leave our Government paid for home, to go to our Government paid for mail box and get our Government check? But who is making the money for the checks if we all just quit?
Exactly.
How exactly did Society decide for little Johnny to drink too much and become an unproductive alcoholic? How did society decide he should drink so much he lost his job and now lives on the street? How is that society’s doing? How is it productive to blame everything on Society and never take responsibility for our own actions? Life can be hard, far harder for some than for others, that does not mean that you quit because the Jones’s have more than you. You work hard and take advantage of what this Country has to offer. Build a life and keep struggling. Stop blaming other’s including society for our own shortcomings.
Again, Exactly.
Choices, decisions made and acted upon that have a direct effect on that persons life and well being. NOT the Governments fault or responsibility.
Numerous studies show that the majority are only homeless for extremely short periods of time; most one night. This supports the assertion that they made a bad choice, understood the results of that choice and acted to correct the problem. Do you think it may be they count those “one nighter’s” to increase the numbers? Maybe get more money?
Let us be clear, no where in the Constitution guarantees you a home. Some things must be worked for, struggled for, should be worked for. The Constitution gives you rights that are there to facilitate you making a home and being a productive member of society. To help you work and make a life.
What have we become when we allow ourselves to never take any responsibility for our own actions? When we blame everything on some unseen outside force or influence? What kind of a Country will we have then?
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson would roll over in their graves.
Semper
My opponent basis his opening post on the premise that these individuals "prefer" to be out on the street with nowhere to go. As that may be the case for a small percentage of the population, ultimately, we can not say that for everyone. With that in mind, it is quite clear that our direction needs to be pointed towards the majority of homeless individuals.
On the contrary, my position is clear in that they made choices that placed them into a homeless situation. Not that they prefer to be homeless. THEY decided to leave their family because their Daddy was too strict, THEY decided to pick up the Crack Pipe, THEY decided to not put the bottle down, THEY decided to quit their job, or not work two jobs and lost everything.
Bad decisions? Yes, but decisions no less.
At this point, I would like to acknowledge the true "crux" of this issue, Society. Homeless people do not "choose" to be homeless, just as drug addicts do not "choose" to be drug addicts.
Wrong. Drug Addicts choose to use drugs. With the obvious extremely rare exception of being tied down and having the drugs forced into your system, the individual chooses to use that drug and to continue using it without concern for the effects; that is until some Liberal Government official comes along and tells them that the Government will support them because they are not strong enough, or willing enough to put the pipe down. Addiction is horrible, but not unbeatable. I know this from personal experience.
This solution has become more of a problem than anything in the last five years. Cancer survivors were prescribed this drug in very large doses and given little warning to the extent of damage it could cause. It was hyped up as a savior, but it was clearly something else. Individuals on this drug became quickly addicted, a addiction that easily compares to a Crystal Meth addiction.
Well almost..
The large amount of oxycodone (10 to 80 mg) present in its controlled release formulations (OxyContin) renders these products highly attractive to opioid abusers and doctor-shoppers. They are abused either as intact tablets or by crushing or chewing the tablet and then swallowing, snorting or injecting the drug
Oxycodone is abused for its opiate-like effects.
OxyContin and heroin have similar effects; therefore, both drugs are attractive to the same abuser population. OxyContin is sometimes referred to as "poor man's heroin,"
www.stopaddiction.com...#" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.stopaddiction.com...#
Granted there is going to be some overlap in reference to those individuals that do not have the self-control or will power to follow the doctor’s orders, but several Google searches will reveal that the majority are simply drug abusers.
Key word, abuse.
Again, Choices.
This is one example, of many to come, of how homeless individuals are not making the choice on their economical status. Are we to believe that people would prefer to sleep out on the sidewalk during the middle of a snowstorm? This is the choice they have made, over paying bills or dealing with family members?
No, they choose to sleep on the side walks during the day in the warm summer and roam the streets at night. Then when big bad winter hits, they are all of a sudden relegated into “those poor people”, never taking into consideration the choices they made to get them there. If they are forever inserted into our society as victims, those choices will never be considered and we will begin a campaign of the Government caring for people instead of people supporting the government. Remember, Socialism is the failed experiment.
It also must be said that political agenda's are not the topic at hand. Faulting administrations for a motion that disagrees with survival of the fittest is off topic, and in my opinion, a ploy to confuse the public to the true intent of this debate.
AH, but it is political my friend. It is as simple as the difference between the strong Conservative values that built this Country, and Liberal values that wish us to be a socialist society. Putting off the Homeless as being non-political is in and of itself a distraction from the true issues surrounding officially naming Homeless victims.
That is.
Giving them certain status as a Governmental supported group that needs to take no responsibility for their own actions. Call then victims all you want as long as it is understood they are the victims of their own poor judgment, not the victims of a society that has and presents every possible advantage for those that are willing to get up in the morning and go out and make a life. Not just to give up and expect the rest of us that are willing to get up and go to work, to support you.
What are you going to do if the majority of society decides to play the victim and become Homeless? What happens when there are no longer any citizens to flip the burgers? Make the bolts and microwaves? What then? Who is going to support an entire country of homeless victims? Sound outrageous? Sure it does, but what if we all just stopped and expected the Government to support us? Why even get up except to leave our Government paid for home, to go to our Government paid for mail box and get our Government check? But who is making the money for the checks if we all just quit?
Exactly.
Society has made this decision for them, they are merely forced to make the best of their current situation.
How exactly did Society decide for little Johnny to drink too much and become an unproductive alcoholic? How did society decide he should drink so much he lost his job and now lives on the street? How is that society’s doing? How is it productive to blame everything on Society and never take responsibility for our own actions? Life can be hard, far harder for some than for others, that does not mean that you quit because the Jones’s have more than you. You work hard and take advantage of what this Country has to offer. Build a life and keep struggling. Stop blaming other’s including society for our own shortcomings.
Again, Exactly.
Choices, decisions made and acted upon that have a direct effect on that persons life and well being. NOT the Governments fault or responsibility.
Most of these experiences are short-term and the individuals exit homelessness with minimal assistance and generally are not seen again.
aspe.hhs.gov..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> aspe.hhs.gov...
Numerous studies show that the majority are only homeless for extremely short periods of time; most one night. This supports the assertion that they made a bad choice, understood the results of that choice and acted to correct the problem. Do you think it may be they count those “one nighter’s” to increase the numbers? Maybe get more money?
Let us be clear, no where in the Constitution guarantees you a home. Some things must be worked for, struggled for, should be worked for. The Constitution gives you rights that are there to facilitate you making a home and being a productive member of society. To help you work and make a life.
What have we become when we allow ourselves to never take any responsibility for our own actions? When we blame everything on some unseen outside force or influence? What kind of a Country will we have then?
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson would roll over in their graves.
Semper
It appears the dance floor is mine.
Your process of thought is filled with stereotypes and flawed assumptions. I noticed you failed to acknowledge the victims of oxycontins that I have mentioned. The educators, politicians, lawyers, and doctors that were consumed by a drug that they had no idea what kind of hold it could have on them. Did they decide to take the drug? Yes, but they did not take it with full knowledge to the damage it could cause. One does not choose to be an addict. We can not fault these individuals who consumed a drug which had an addiction that was sure to follow.
The notion that all homeless individuals are "bums" is another seriously flawed assumption. I merely try to point out that the regular joe, just like me or you, could of ended up in their situation and found ourselves on the street.
If you were a victim of this, would you rather the Conservative "Survival of the Fittest", or the Socialist "Leave No Man Behind" mentality? Sometimes our "advantages" in life act as a smoke screen to the bigger picture.
Now this is where you are wrong. You base your reasoning on Google searches, while I base my thinking on "First Hand Experience". These individuals consumed the drug exactly how the doctor ordered. They did not "Abuse" the drug that had been prescribed to them. You've been manipulated by a glorious Google search to believe these Drug Users are actually Drug Abusers.
Since when did we believe everything that Google told us? What if I Googled "Failure". Enough said.
Platform for a political agenda? Or debate on the homeless?
This mentality of "those poor people" has been created by society, not by the individuals themselves. How can we fault them for something society has created.
Are you sure about that one? Victims of their own poor judgment? Have we never made a bad decision? Have you never had to cut a few corners to make a rent/mortgage payment? What about those corners you cut one month, did they build up over time? If they built up to a mountain that was unsurmountable, what decisions would they have? Are we to believe that regular joe's, good fathers, great husbands, respectable people, do not fight this reality off every day?
All homeless people are not bums, they are not drug users/abusers, they are not criminals. To say otherwise, is yet again, a stereotype. But it appears that stereotypes are the base of this mountain I am trying to bring down.
You say that society has provided them every opportunity to pull themselves out of the gutter. But you can not actually believe that? If you were homeless, and you actually had a clean shirt to attend a job interview, what would you provide as contact information? What would be your address? What would be your phone number?
Honestly though, this is the actual crux of the issue for homeless individuals who are actually trying to help themselves out. So let's hear it, what is the answer to this problem?
Are we to believe that the employer's will not judge the individual who is homeless? Are we to believe that they would be given the same opportunity in an organization?
Once an individual is homeless, it is extremely tough to get out of the vicious circle that has been created for themselves. Employment, it is next to impossible to attain. Your only hope would be knowing somebody who knows somebody, otherwise how could you possibly get a job?
Unlike a certain opponent, I will tackle your tough questions head on. And I wish to acknowledge ANY situation where discussing the extremities gives a fair calculation to the situation at hand. Is it reasonable to discuss the absolute extremes? I do not think so. But for the sake of discussion, let's look at it. If everybody stopped? The economy would crumble, society would be in shambles, and we would be left to defend our own. You would not lose your house, car, clothing, or any thing else for that matter. Who would come and get it? Who would repossess it?
But as I have said, extremities do nothing for any argument.
What does any of this have to do with the question: "Are Homeless Individuals A Victim Of Their Own Wrongdoing"
You, my friend, are a true patriot. I would never debate you on patriotism, because it is quite obvious, you would kick my backside. But, fortunately, this debate is not about being patriotic. It has nothing to do with much of what you have said.
But the smoke screen is tough to fight. I commend you, very talented.
I now point our attention to the true "homeless". My opponent has said that most homeless individuals are one nighters. Interesting thought, google may agree. But, if we can get back to the issue at hand, we can explore some of the "true" victims of homelessness.
■ Poverty - my opponent fails to acknowledge how children are born into poverty and never had a chance to overcome it. We do not choose to live below the poverty line, we do not choose the environment we inhabit. It is a decision made for us, which seems to be the trend with homelessness.
■ Foster Care Children - need I discuss the faults in this process? Sometimes I would rather see a child on the street than hear of the abuse they go through in the Foster Care system. Sexual, physical, psychological abuse at the hand of those who should be caring for them. Is it actually their "decision" to be homeless. Or was it a decision predetermined for them.
■ Civilians During War - I never read the article in Darfur that said it was their choice to undergo a complete genocide.
■ War Veterans - Need I say anything? I think the term itself speaks a thousand words. With our post limit, it is fortunate it is willing to do some of the work for me.
Are these extremities? No, the individuals that fit these categories make up the majority of homeless individuals. We are not talking about the population of "American Homeless" individuals, we are talking about every homeless person. My opponent believes that the "One Nighters" make up the population of homeless people, but what would he say to those who live in Darfur? What about those who returned from Vietnam? Those who were sexually abused in an orphanage?
Did they make this decision? It is quite clear what the answer to that question is.
Get on your dancing shoes my friend, the floor is yours.
On the contrary, my position is clear in that they made choices that placed them into a homeless situation. Not that they prefer to be homeless. THEY decided to leave their family because their Daddy was too strict, THEY decided to pick up the Crack Pipe, THEY decided to not put the bottle down, THEY decided to quit their job, or not work two jobs and lost everything.
Your process of thought is filled with stereotypes and flawed assumptions. I noticed you failed to acknowledge the victims of oxycontins that I have mentioned. The educators, politicians, lawyers, and doctors that were consumed by a drug that they had no idea what kind of hold it could have on them. Did they decide to take the drug? Yes, but they did not take it with full knowledge to the damage it could cause. One does not choose to be an addict. We can not fault these individuals who consumed a drug which had an addiction that was sure to follow.
The notion that all homeless individuals are "bums" is another seriously flawed assumption. I merely try to point out that the regular joe, just like me or you, could of ended up in their situation and found ourselves on the street.
If you were a victim of this, would you rather the Conservative "Survival of the Fittest", or the Socialist "Leave No Man Behind" mentality? Sometimes our "advantages" in life act as a smoke screen to the bigger picture.
Granted there is going to be some overlap in reference to those individuals that do not have the self-control or will power to follow the doctor’s orders, but several Google searches will reveal that the majority are simply drug abusers.
Now this is where you are wrong. You base your reasoning on Google searches, while I base my thinking on "First Hand Experience". These individuals consumed the drug exactly how the doctor ordered. They did not "Abuse" the drug that had been prescribed to them. You've been manipulated by a glorious Google search to believe these Drug Users are actually Drug Abusers.
Since when did we believe everything that Google told us? What if I Googled "Failure". Enough said.
No, they choose to sleep on the side walks during the day in the warm summer and roam the streets at night. Then when big bad winter hits, they are all of a sudden relegated into “those poor people”, never taking into consideration the choices they made to get them there. If they are forever inserted into our society as victims, those choices will never be considered and we will begin a campaign of the Government caring for people instead of people supporting the government. Remember, Socialism is the failed experiment.
Platform for a political agenda? Or debate on the homeless?
This mentality of "those poor people" has been created by society, not by the individuals themselves. How can we fault them for something society has created.
Giving them certain status as a Governmental supported group that needs to take no responsibility for their own actions. Call then victims all you want as long as it is understood they are the victims of their own poor judgment, not the victims of a society that has and presents every possible advantage for those that are willing to get up in the morning and go out and make a life. Not just to give up and expect the rest of us that are willing to get up and go to work, to support you.
Are you sure about that one? Victims of their own poor judgment? Have we never made a bad decision? Have you never had to cut a few corners to make a rent/mortgage payment? What about those corners you cut one month, did they build up over time? If they built up to a mountain that was unsurmountable, what decisions would they have? Are we to believe that regular joe's, good fathers, great husbands, respectable people, do not fight this reality off every day?
All homeless people are not bums, they are not drug users/abusers, they are not criminals. To say otherwise, is yet again, a stereotype. But it appears that stereotypes are the base of this mountain I am trying to bring down.
You say that society has provided them every opportunity to pull themselves out of the gutter. But you can not actually believe that? If you were homeless, and you actually had a clean shirt to attend a job interview, what would you provide as contact information? What would be your address? What would be your phone number?
Honestly though, this is the actual crux of the issue for homeless individuals who are actually trying to help themselves out. So let's hear it, what is the answer to this problem?
Are we to believe that the employer's will not judge the individual who is homeless? Are we to believe that they would be given the same opportunity in an organization?
Once an individual is homeless, it is extremely tough to get out of the vicious circle that has been created for themselves. Employment, it is next to impossible to attain. Your only hope would be knowing somebody who knows somebody, otherwise how could you possibly get a job?
What are you going to do if the majority of society decides to play the victim and become Homeless? What happens when there are no longer any citizens to flip the burgers? Make the bolts and microwaves? What then? Who is going to support an entire country of homeless victims?
Unlike a certain opponent, I will tackle your tough questions head on. And I wish to acknowledge ANY situation where discussing the extremities gives a fair calculation to the situation at hand. Is it reasonable to discuss the absolute extremes? I do not think so. But for the sake of discussion, let's look at it. If everybody stopped? The economy would crumble, society would be in shambles, and we would be left to defend our own. You would not lose your house, car, clothing, or any thing else for that matter. Who would come and get it? Who would repossess it?
But as I have said, extremities do nothing for any argument.
Let us be clear, no where in the Constitution guarantees you a home. Some things must be worked for, struggled for, should be worked for. The Constitution gives you rights that are there to facilitate you making a home and being a productive member of society. To help you work and make a life.
What does any of this have to do with the question: "Are Homeless Individuals A Victim Of Their Own Wrongdoing"
George Washington and Thomas Jefferson would roll over in their graves.
You, my friend, are a true patriot. I would never debate you on patriotism, because it is quite obvious, you would kick my backside. But, fortunately, this debate is not about being patriotic. It has nothing to do with much of what you have said.
But the smoke screen is tough to fight. I commend you, very talented.
I now point our attention to the true "homeless". My opponent has said that most homeless individuals are one nighters. Interesting thought, google may agree. But, if we can get back to the issue at hand, we can explore some of the "true" victims of homelessness.
■ Poverty - my opponent fails to acknowledge how children are born into poverty and never had a chance to overcome it. We do not choose to live below the poverty line, we do not choose the environment we inhabit. It is a decision made for us, which seems to be the trend with homelessness.
■ Foster Care Children - need I discuss the faults in this process? Sometimes I would rather see a child on the street than hear of the abuse they go through in the Foster Care system. Sexual, physical, psychological abuse at the hand of those who should be caring for them. Is it actually their "decision" to be homeless. Or was it a decision predetermined for them.
■ Civilians During War - I never read the article in Darfur that said it was their choice to undergo a complete genocide.
■ War Veterans - Need I say anything? I think the term itself speaks a thousand words. With our post limit, it is fortunate it is willing to do some of the work for me.
Are these extremities? No, the individuals that fit these categories make up the majority of homeless individuals. We are not talking about the population of "American Homeless" individuals, we are talking about every homeless person. My opponent believes that the "One Nighters" make up the population of homeless people, but what would he say to those who live in Darfur? What about those who returned from Vietnam? Those who were sexually abused in an orphanage?
Did they make this decision? It is quite clear what the answer to that question is.
Get on your dancing shoes my friend, the floor is yours.
First and foremost let me make a strong point. I have not ever used the word BUM, on here or anywhere else in the context of referring to the
Homeless. That is a verbiage of my opponents creation and in no way is indicative of my opinion, thought process or feelings toward the Homeless.
Now on with the debate.
I absolutely DID acknowledge the ABUSERS of the drug Oxycodone. You are mistaken in your numbers. The VAST majority of Oxycodone Abusers are NOT prior Prescription Subjects. They are drug abusers pure and simple.
Please read here for more information:
opioids.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> opioids.com...
I believe I addressed that in my opening statement.
Absolutely the Survival of the fittest. When are the Socialist going to learn that their system has failed in every attempt throughout history?
A big heart will not feed the starving country, fix a failed economy or free the citizens that will flee from such a state as has occurred in the past.
Remember; “The path to Hell is paved with good intentions.”
Actually I base my research on any number of resources, but you are correct in that very little is first hand experience. I will also challenge you on your “First Hand Experience.”
How many Homeless do you think you have met and observed and come to know in your lifetime? Let us just go “Hog Wild” and say 1000. I am sure it is not near that high, but for arguments sake, let us fix it at that.
Now; taking into account that Liberals estimate 1.2 Million on a given Night and Conservative estimate 6 to 8 Hundred Thousand. That would mathematically calculate that you have had contact with .6% (Six Tenths of a percent) of the Homeless, or less. If in fact you could have ever had contact with 1000 Homeless on any given Night. (Unlikely)
That is NOT enough for you to make any even mildly correct evaluations of their plight or their particular circumstances.
So, we are left with research. Google, Yahoo, National Center for the Homeless, Dallas Homeless Foundation, on and on. Some great information there gathered by TEAMS of individuals over years of study.
As specified in the previous post, they are the same. To imagine one could relegate a situation as high profile as the Homeless to one of Non-Politics, is delusional at best in today’s society.
Of course I have and of course they do.
Yet proof of my convictions lie in the FACT that only a very small percentage end up Homeless. Only those that give up. Those that stop struggling. Begin to support them with Government programs by calling them victims and those numbers will rise exponentially.
No one has said that they are ALL drug abusers. No one has said they are all Criminals.
Recall my previous posting.
I believe that was clear. Choices!
How is victim status going to help with that?
And yet MILLIONS apparently manage this feat of impossibility. I wonder how it is that MANY do and some do not. Perhaps it is Choice after all. Some choose to, others do not. That would sure explain it.
Exactly what has happened in every other instance where Socialism was attempted or where the Government began taking to big a role in the affairs of the Citizens.
That is a perfect example of the point I was making. You are correct; everything would crumble and you would need to build walls to keep your citizens from escaping and further destroying your economy. Sound familiar?
I am confused as to what smoke screen you are referring to? I have answered each and everyone one of your points as succinctly as I can.
As for this.
I draw your attention to Websters Law Dictionary Definition
“Wrongdoing”
As you can clearly see, Improper Behavior is paramount. Again, choices.
Bad choices, but still in all, choices made by individuals. Not choosing to be Homeless, no, choosing to not correct that mistake on their own. Choosing an action that creates the Homeless condition. Choosing to wait until such time as enough Liberals activists can enable the Government to take care of them with little or no effort on their part.
In discussing any issue, particularly one as large and complex as this, one must of course bow to the constraints of time and in this case, space. To imagine that we could debate every single aspect of Homelessness in an opening, closing and 2 rebuttals is unrealistic. As such, the only choice we are left with is to discuss the issue in all of its generalities. I can not imagine how that would be possible without focus on the main and more prominent conditions and aspects of the issue. I have presented these in my opening and will continue to concentrate my efforts on this.
A long time ago I heard or read a quote. “Don’t give them a hand out, give them a hand up.”
This simply and eloquently expresses my stand on the issue of Homelessness.
The assistance these people needs should first come from the Family, then the individual community. It is not the Governments place to coddle to and support those people that are unwilling to help themselves, or for that matter, those that made poor choices and must live with those choices.
Again. Let me reiterate. I am not taking a heartless stance. I am simply being practical in regards to the Governments role and the individual responsibility of each citizen.
When does the Government stop interfering? When are the citizens to be made responsible for their actions? When does the Government help stop? Who will make them get employment, if ever?
When do they stop being victims?
Semper
Now on with the debate.
I noticed you failed to acknowledge the victims of oxycontins that I have mentioned. One does not choose to be an addict. We can not fault these individuals who consumed a drug which had an addiction that was sure to follow.
I absolutely DID acknowledge the ABUSERS of the drug Oxycodone. You are mistaken in your numbers. The VAST majority of Oxycodone Abusers are NOT prior Prescription Subjects. They are drug abusers pure and simple.
Please read here for more information:
opioids.com..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> opioids.com...
The notion that all homeless individuals are "bums" is another seriously flawed assumption.
I believe I addressed that in my opening statement.
If you were a victim of this, would you rather the Conservative "Survival of the Fittest", or the Socialist "Leave No Man Behind" mentality? Sometimes our "advantages" in life act as a smoke screen to the bigger picture.
Absolutely the Survival of the fittest. When are the Socialist going to learn that their system has failed in every attempt throughout history?
A big heart will not feed the starving country, fix a failed economy or free the citizens that will flee from such a state as has occurred in the past.
Remember; “The path to Hell is paved with good intentions.”
The empirical evidence shows that socialism is an obvious failure. And the cause of socialism's failure is crystal clear: there is almost no private ownership of the means of production, and almost all factors of production are owned in common in precisely the same way that Americans own the Postal Service.
www.mises.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.mises.org...
Now this is where you are wrong. You base your reasoning on Google searches, while I base my thinking on "First Hand Experience".
Actually I base my research on any number of resources, but you are correct in that very little is first hand experience. I will also challenge you on your “First Hand Experience.”
How many Homeless do you think you have met and observed and come to know in your lifetime? Let us just go “Hog Wild” and say 1000. I am sure it is not near that high, but for arguments sake, let us fix it at that.
Now; taking into account that Liberals estimate 1.2 Million on a given Night and Conservative estimate 6 to 8 Hundred Thousand. That would mathematically calculate that you have had contact with .6% (Six Tenths of a percent) of the Homeless, or less. If in fact you could have ever had contact with 1000 Homeless on any given Night. (Unlikely)
That is NOT enough for you to make any even mildly correct evaluations of their plight or their particular circumstances.
So, we are left with research. Google, Yahoo, National Center for the Homeless, Dallas Homeless Foundation, on and on. Some great information there gathered by TEAMS of individuals over years of study.
Platform for a political agenda? Or debate on the homeless?
As specified in the previous post, they are the same. To imagine one could relegate a situation as high profile as the Homeless to one of Non-Politics, is delusional at best in today’s society.
Are you sure about that one? Victims of their own poor judgment? Have we never made a bad decision? Have you never had to cut a few corners to make a rent/mortgage payment? What about those corners you cut one month, did they build up over time? If they built up to a mountain that was unsurmountable, what decisions would they have? Are we to believe that regular joe's, good fathers, great husbands, respectable people, do not fight this reality off every day?
Of course I have and of course they do.
Yet proof of my convictions lie in the FACT that only a very small percentage end up Homeless. Only those that give up. Those that stop struggling. Begin to support them with Government programs by calling them victims and those numbers will rise exponentially.
All homeless people are not bums, they are not drug users/abusers, they are not criminals. To say otherwise, is yet again, a stereotype. But it appears that stereotypes are the base of this mountain I am trying to bring down.
No one has said that they are ALL drug abusers. No one has said they are all Criminals.
Recall my previous posting.
Individual Factors
On an individual level, homelessness is frequently the result of a crisis in someone's life. There is a range of events or crisis points that can trigger homelessness, identified by Fitzpatrick and Klinker (2000) as being:
• Leaving the parental home after arguments
• Marital or relationship breakdown
• Widowhood
• Leaving care
• Leaving prison
• A sharp deterioration of mental health
• Increased drug or alcohol misuse
• A financial crisis or mounting debts
• Eviction
I believe that was clear. Choices!
You say that society has provided them every opportunity to pull themselves out of the gutter. But you can not actually believe that? If you were homeless, and you actually had a clean shirt to attend a job interview, what would you provide as contact information? What would be your address? What would be your phone number?
In many cases people are in and out of the homeless system, which includes shelters, hospitals, the streets, and prisons. It is these chronic users of the system that utilize up to 90% of the nations resources devoted to the problem.
homeless.org..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> homeless.org...
So often on the street I've seen people shake a set of keys with a big smile on their face saying 'I've got a place.' But often they end up spending most of their time on the streets anyway because they just don't know anyone else other than other homeless people and an empty room is very lonely. Homelessness is about a lack of connectedness. Belonging somewhere is about belonging with other people. Like belonging to a family or local community.www.homeless.org.au..." target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow"> www.homeless.org.au...
How is victim status going to help with that?
Once an individual is homeless, it is extremely tough to get out of the vicious circle that has been created for themselves. Employment, it is next to impossible to attain. Your only hope would be knowing somebody who knows somebody, otherwise how could you possibly get a job?
And yet MILLIONS apparently manage this feat of impossibility. I wonder how it is that MANY do and some do not. Perhaps it is Choice after all. Some choose to, others do not. That would sure explain it.
Unlike a certain opponent, I will tackle your tough questions head on. And I wish to acknowledge ANY situation where discussing the extremities gives a fair calculation to the situation at hand. Is it reasonable to discuss the absolute extremes? I do not think so. But for the sake of discussion, let's look at it. If everybody stopped? The economy would crumble, society would be in shambles, and we would be left to defend our own. You would not lose your house, car, clothing, or any thing else for that matter. Who would come and get it? Who would repossess it?
Exactly what has happened in every other instance where Socialism was attempted or where the Government began taking to big a role in the affairs of the Citizens.
That is a perfect example of the point I was making. You are correct; everything would crumble and you would need to build walls to keep your citizens from escaping and further destroying your economy. Sound familiar?
But the smoke screen is tough to fight. I commend you, very talented.
I am confused as to what smoke screen you are referring to? I have answered each and everyone one of your points as succinctly as I can.
As for this.
What does any of this have to do with the question: "Are Homeless Individuals A Victim Of Their Own Wrongdoing"
I draw your attention to Websters Law Dictionary Definition
“Wrongdoing”
Main Entry: wrong•do•ing
Pronunciation: 'ro[ng]-"dü-i[ng]
Function: noun
: injurious, criminal, or improper behavior
As you can clearly see, Improper Behavior is paramount. Again, choices.
Bad choices, but still in all, choices made by individuals. Not choosing to be Homeless, no, choosing to not correct that mistake on their own. Choosing an action that creates the Homeless condition. Choosing to wait until such time as enough Liberals activists can enable the Government to take care of them with little or no effort on their part.
My opponent believes that the "One Nighters" make up the population of homeless people, but what would he say to those who live in Darfur? What about those who returned from Vietnam? Those who were sexually abused in an orphanage?
In discussing any issue, particularly one as large and complex as this, one must of course bow to the constraints of time and in this case, space. To imagine that we could debate every single aspect of Homelessness in an opening, closing and 2 rebuttals is unrealistic. As such, the only choice we are left with is to discuss the issue in all of its generalities. I can not imagine how that would be possible without focus on the main and more prominent conditions and aspects of the issue. I have presented these in my opening and will continue to concentrate my efforts on this.
A long time ago I heard or read a quote. “Don’t give them a hand out, give them a hand up.”
This simply and eloquently expresses my stand on the issue of Homelessness.
The assistance these people needs should first come from the Family, then the individual community. It is not the Governments place to coddle to and support those people that are unwilling to help themselves, or for that matter, those that made poor choices and must live with those choices.
Again. Let me reiterate. I am not taking a heartless stance. I am simply being practical in regards to the Governments role and the individual responsibility of each citizen.
When does the Government stop interfering? When are the citizens to be made responsible for their actions? When does the Government help stop? Who will make them get employment, if ever?
When do they stop being victims?
Semper
Some much needed emotion in the H2H forum. semp, I am looking forward to the last few miles here.
Here goes...
Initially I must apologize to my opponent. I do not believe I had ever said that he used the term "bum", but I had inclined that the term was widely used by society. Bit of a difference, but I wished to initially clear that up.
Now semper, my friend, this is the smoke screen that I am trying to bring awareness to. None of this has any relevance to the topic at hand. Do I agree with the statement you are trying to portray? I may, I may not, none of it has any validity to the topic at hand. We are discussing whether or not the homeless are a victim of their own wrongdoing. We are not discussing whether or not Socialism has worked in the past or the effects it may have on the economy. Sure, both of these components have a relevance to homelessness, but we are dealing with a specific aspect of homelessness. We are dealing with "exactly" how they had found themselves without a home. We are asking the question "it is their own fault"? What society, government, etc., have to do to resolve the issue, has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
Hence, the smoke screen.
You question my first hand experience with pure logic. But is a small portion of first hand experience better than none at all? I am merely trying to instill a sense of possibility into this debate. You and I, on a daily basis run the risk of becoming the next statistic of homelessness. Sometimes the events that play out before us, completely out of our control, could leave us in the gutter. This percentage of homeless people do exist, and I have met them, which is why I resent the notion that homeless individuals are a product of their own wrongdoing.
And what have you done through your own efforts, that has been "enough"? Searching statistics on the internet? Reading studies done by organizations that have a specific agenda? Consumed by material that is completely slandered with blatant bias? I do not wish to construe any of the details pertaining to the subject at hand, merely present the first hand experiences I have enjoyed.
Of the homeless individuals I have met, "most" of them were in their situation do to extenuating circumstances that were beyond their own control. Of those who were on the streets due to personal reasons, they were doing their best to help themselves out but had little acceptance from society.
My opponent has said time and time again that society is willing to do what it can to help these individuals. But it is quite clear that this is not the case. I reference the job interview once again. Without some concrete contact information, how can they possibly attain employment? They can not, due to the fact that they are going to be judged by their economical situation. Efforts could be made to accommodate the individual quite easily. They could check back in over the next week or two to see if they are interested, or place more emphasis on their own merit rather than economical situation. But this would not be an option, because it is a fair assumption to make that, the organization will quickly judge the attire, look, etc., of the individual.
Society has swung the pendulum the other way when it comes to race, gender, sexual preference, etc., but it fails to acknowledge their prejudices when it comes to economical situations of the individual.
Quite the opposite actually, as I had never said the homeless do not overcome the situation. What I had said was, it is extremely difficult to overcome the hurdles placed before them. But if five homeless individuals find a home, employment, care, etc., today, than five more will find themselves on the street by the time the sun goes down. But again, this is not a debate on whether or not it is a choice to stay on the street. Connectedness is a big issue with homelessness. Individuals may find themselves on the street and take comfort in the seclusion they inherit. But that is not the topic of our discussion. Our discussion is whether or not it is their choice to find themselves on the street.
So yet again, this is another large percentage of your post, that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Remember, it is the process of finding themselves on the street. Even the "Survival of the Fittest" mentality is completely irrelevant to the situation, because that only comes into play once the individual finds themself on the street.
"Are Homeless Individuals A Victim Of Their Own Wrongdoing?"
Do you not see that this has nothing to do with the subject at hand?
It is quite clear that you have strayed far off topic in your pursuit to inundate us with the "Conservative" mentality.
No, we are discussing one specific aspect of homelessness. The process in which they find themselves on the street is what we are discussing. Your attempt to discuss all of the generalities of the topic has left you wandering about the subject in the presence of your own smokescreen.
To conclude my final rebuttal, I wish to look at the facts to the subject at hand once again.
Who Are The Homeless?
Let's compare the lists.
chissler - ■
semperfortis - •
■ Poverty
■ Serious Mental Illness
■ Disabilities
■ Foster Care Children
■ Victims of Domestic Abuse
■ Civilians During War
■ War Veterans
■ Genocide Survivors
• Marital or relationship breakdown
• Widowhood
• Leaving care
• Leaving prison
• A sharp deterioration of mental health
• Increased drug or alcohol misuse
• A financial crisis or mounting debts
• Eviction
My opponent has openly stated that the majority of homeless individuals are "over-nighters" which are made up of what? Widows? I fail to see how anyone chooses to be a widow. I would have to rethink my search engines on that one. We can look at victims of eviction, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, etc., now we are to believe that these individuals make up the majority?
I find that extremely tough to believe, and I do not accept it.
Are we to believe that drug abusers outweigh the victims of genocide worldwide? Are we to believe that individuals who were evicted from their homes outweigh the number of homeless civilians during war? Now my opponent would have you believe yes, but is that actually the case?
The truth is quite clear to me, but I guess it is a decision that is left to be made by the individual.
Taking a closer look at Darfur,
Each article was published on separate dates, which explains the difference in figures. But this is one example that I am attempting to bring to our attention. Remember, one example. With this, do you honestly believe that alcoholics and individuals who were evicted outweigh?
Nowhere in the question does it say American, Canadian, or any other specific nationality. It clearly states:
"Are Homeless Individuals A Victim of Their Own Wrongdoing?"
I've shown the details, I've stated the facts, and I've offered first hand experience.
I have the utmost respect for my worthy opponent, and I am looking forward to his closing statement. This has been quite the battle between mutual friends.
The dance is coming to an end my friend, the floor is yours.
Here goes...
Initially I must apologize to my opponent. I do not believe I had ever said that he used the term "bum", but I had inclined that the term was widely used by society. Bit of a difference, but I wished to initially clear that up.
Absolutely the Survival of the fittest. When are the Socialist going to learn that their system has failed in every attempt throughout history?
A big heart will not feed the starving country, fix a failed economy or free the citizens that will flee from such a state as has occurred in the past.
Remember; “The path to Hell is paved with good intentions.”
Now semper, my friend, this is the smoke screen that I am trying to bring awareness to. None of this has any relevance to the topic at hand. Do I agree with the statement you are trying to portray? I may, I may not, none of it has any validity to the topic at hand. We are discussing whether or not the homeless are a victim of their own wrongdoing. We are not discussing whether or not Socialism has worked in the past or the effects it may have on the economy. Sure, both of these components have a relevance to homelessness, but we are dealing with a specific aspect of homelessness. We are dealing with "exactly" how they had found themselves without a home. We are asking the question "it is their own fault"? What society, government, etc., have to do to resolve the issue, has nothing to do with the issue at hand.
Hence, the smoke screen.
You question my first hand experience with pure logic. But is a small portion of first hand experience better than none at all? I am merely trying to instill a sense of possibility into this debate. You and I, on a daily basis run the risk of becoming the next statistic of homelessness. Sometimes the events that play out before us, completely out of our control, could leave us in the gutter. This percentage of homeless people do exist, and I have met them, which is why I resent the notion that homeless individuals are a product of their own wrongdoing.
That is NOT enough for you to make any even mildly correct evaluations of their plight or their particular circumstances.
And what have you done through your own efforts, that has been "enough"? Searching statistics on the internet? Reading studies done by organizations that have a specific agenda? Consumed by material that is completely slandered with blatant bias? I do not wish to construe any of the details pertaining to the subject at hand, merely present the first hand experiences I have enjoyed.
Of the homeless individuals I have met, "most" of them were in their situation do to extenuating circumstances that were beyond their own control. Of those who were on the streets due to personal reasons, they were doing their best to help themselves out but had little acceptance from society.
My opponent has said time and time again that society is willing to do what it can to help these individuals. But it is quite clear that this is not the case. I reference the job interview once again. Without some concrete contact information, how can they possibly attain employment? They can not, due to the fact that they are going to be judged by their economical situation. Efforts could be made to accommodate the individual quite easily. They could check back in over the next week or two to see if they are interested, or place more emphasis on their own merit rather than economical situation. But this would not be an option, because it is a fair assumption to make that, the organization will quickly judge the attire, look, etc., of the individual.
Society has swung the pendulum the other way when it comes to race, gender, sexual preference, etc., but it fails to acknowledge their prejudices when it comes to economical situations of the individual.
And yet MILLIONS apparently manage this feat of impossibility. I wonder how it is that MANY do and some do not. Perhaps it is Choice after all. Some choose to, others do not. That would sure explain it.
Quite the opposite actually, as I had never said the homeless do not overcome the situation. What I had said was, it is extremely difficult to overcome the hurdles placed before them. But if five homeless individuals find a home, employment, care, etc., today, than five more will find themselves on the street by the time the sun goes down. But again, this is not a debate on whether or not it is a choice to stay on the street. Connectedness is a big issue with homelessness. Individuals may find themselves on the street and take comfort in the seclusion they inherit. But that is not the topic of our discussion. Our discussion is whether or not it is their choice to find themselves on the street.
So yet again, this is another large percentage of your post, that has absolutely nothing to do with the topic at hand. Remember, it is the process of finding themselves on the street. Even the "Survival of the Fittest" mentality is completely irrelevant to the situation, because that only comes into play once the individual finds themself on the street.
"Are Homeless Individuals A Victim Of Their Own Wrongdoing?"
Choosing to wait until such time as enough Liberals activists can enable the Government to take care of them with little or no effort on their part.
Do you not see that this has nothing to do with the subject at hand?
It is quite clear that you have strayed far off topic in your pursuit to inundate us with the "Conservative" mentality.
To imagine that we could debate every single aspect of Homelessness in an opening, closing and 2 rebuttals is unrealistic. As such, the only choice we are left with is to discuss the issue in all of its generalities.
No, we are discussing one specific aspect of homelessness. The process in which they find themselves on the street is what we are discussing. Your attempt to discuss all of the generalities of the topic has left you wandering about the subject in the presence of your own smokescreen.
To conclude my final rebuttal, I wish to look at the facts to the subject at hand once again.
Who Are The Homeless?
Let's compare the lists.
chissler - ■
semperfortis - •
■ Poverty
■ Serious Mental Illness
■ Disabilities
■ Foster Care Children
■ Victims of Domestic Abuse
■ Civilians During War
■ War Veterans
■ Genocide Survivors
• Marital or relationship breakdown
• Widowhood
• Leaving care
• Leaving prison
• A sharp deterioration of mental health
• Increased drug or alcohol misuse
• A financial crisis or mounting debts
• Eviction
My opponent has openly stated that the majority of homeless individuals are "over-nighters" which are made up of what? Widows? I fail to see how anyone chooses to be a widow. I would have to rethink my search engines on that one. We can look at victims of eviction, drug abuse, alcohol abuse, etc., now we are to believe that these individuals make up the majority?
I find that extremely tough to believe, and I do not accept it.
Are we to believe that drug abusers outweigh the victims of genocide worldwide? Are we to believe that individuals who were evicted from their homes outweigh the number of homeless civilians during war? Now my opponent would have you believe yes, but is that actually the case?
The truth is quite clear to me, but I guess it is a decision that is left to be made by the individual.
Taking a closer look at Darfur,
According to the United Nations, at least 70,000 people have been killed, mainly civilians, and about 1.6 million have fled their homes.
Link
Nicholas D Kristof Op-Ed column says Pres Bush has not spoken publicly about genocide in Darfur since Jan; recounts horrific tale of one woman there, who is among 2.2 million homeless people from Darfur
NY Times
Each article was published on separate dates, which explains the difference in figures. But this is one example that I am attempting to bring to our attention. Remember, one example. With this, do you honestly believe that alcoholics and individuals who were evicted outweigh?
Nowhere in the question does it say American, Canadian, or any other specific nationality. It clearly states:
"Are Homeless Individuals A Victim of Their Own Wrongdoing?"
I've shown the details, I've stated the facts, and I've offered first hand experience.
I have the utmost respect for my worthy opponent, and I am looking forward to his closing statement. This has been quite the battle between mutual friends.
The dance is coming to an end my friend, the floor is yours.
Semper’s Closing
My opponent brought up so many good points and was obviously so passionate about the issue, that I have been mulling over this closing for quite some time now. Actually it was my opponent that gave me the inspiration on how to sum this entire issue up into one neat, tidy bundle that you can all take home with you to contemplate at your ease.
Emotions.
Chissler,
I was initially concentrating my stance on the choices made by individuals and the impact those choices have on their lives. Every posting, every thought I put up for debate, you countered with one of your own; based on emotional reaction to the circumstances of their lives.
On reading your thoughts in detail, it is obvious that you care for the plight of the Homeless. That is admirable and to be commended. It is also very apparent that your personal experiences have made you especially emotional in dealing with this issue. Those emotions are a credit to you, your personality and your character.
Those emotions are however self defeating in any productive attempt to resolve an issue; particularly one that affects so many different people existing in so diverse an environment, with so very many dissimilar personal tragedies.
The issues that have created the current Homeless situation in this country are simply and succinctly the result of actions taken by individuals without due regard for the consequences of those actions. There is no easy way to avoid this, or deflect it as any form of “smoke screen.” With the rare exception, the person that finds themselves homeless, does so because at some point in their lives, they decided to perform some action, NOT perform some action, or allow some issue to continue to exist. They did this until such time as they lost the ability to, or gave up on the ability to continue being productive in our society.
Sad? Yes. The government’s problem? No. The result of their own wrongdoing? Absolutely.
Remember this definition.
“Wrongdoing”
Noun
Behavior or action that is wrong.
(Dictionary.com)
I believe that all will agree that any action that you take, any action that you fail to take, that causes you to become homeless, would fall under that category of an “Action that is wrong.”
Whether that action, that behavior is spending outside of the budget, drinking too much, picking up that crack pipe, or not discontinuing the use of a prescription medicine when that use becomes detrimental to one’s well being. They made that choice; they did or did not perform that action that caused their condition.
My opponent has spent copious amounts of time lamenting how it is difficult to impossible for the homeless to obtain employment. I present to you that this is not the debate. The debate is whether or not they are victims of their own wrongdoing. My opponent related at length the specifics of a certain prescription medicine and how difficult it is to break that addiction. Yet, at some point the individual could have put it down and sought help “before” losing everything and becoming one of the homeless we are debating.
Many that reflect upon what has been written here will, as my opponent, feel emotional about the plight these people suffer. I caution you against allowing that to be the basis for any actions you may consider in support of assisting the effort to solve this problem. Emotions are the antipathy of correct actions. Emotions have little value in the pursuit of solutions, especially those that are as convoluted and difficult as this.
I have presented factual and supported evidence and explained my stance on this issue. Although each of us must be expected to decide such things for ourselves, the inescapable fact remains that each homeless person, did at some point in their lives, make that one, two or more decisions that created their environment.
The facts remain that the large majority of homeless are only in that situation for a limited period of time. They improve their living conditions on their own. Thus further establishing my point for me.
The fact remains that you can not possibly become an addict, an alcoholic or criminal without making the decision to drink, use narcotics or break the law. Those decisions fall under the definition of wrongdoing. There by again establishing my point for me.
When one is out enjoying the wonders this country has to offer, it is impossible to see a homeless person and not feel emotional about their plight. The emotions that you feel will not correct their condition on any permanent basis. They must be instructed in how to not place themselves in that situation as much as they must be helped out of it.
The most effective solution is to teach them what they did wrong, what actions they took that caused them to be homeless and then teach them to not do it again.
Enable them to help themselves.
Semper
My opponent brought up so many good points and was obviously so passionate about the issue, that I have been mulling over this closing for quite some time now. Actually it was my opponent that gave me the inspiration on how to sum this entire issue up into one neat, tidy bundle that you can all take home with you to contemplate at your ease.
Emotions.
Chissler,
I was initially concentrating my stance on the choices made by individuals and the impact those choices have on their lives. Every posting, every thought I put up for debate, you countered with one of your own; based on emotional reaction to the circumstances of their lives.
On reading your thoughts in detail, it is obvious that you care for the plight of the Homeless. That is admirable and to be commended. It is also very apparent that your personal experiences have made you especially emotional in dealing with this issue. Those emotions are a credit to you, your personality and your character.
Those emotions are however self defeating in any productive attempt to resolve an issue; particularly one that affects so many different people existing in so diverse an environment, with so very many dissimilar personal tragedies.
The issues that have created the current Homeless situation in this country are simply and succinctly the result of actions taken by individuals without due regard for the consequences of those actions. There is no easy way to avoid this, or deflect it as any form of “smoke screen.” With the rare exception, the person that finds themselves homeless, does so because at some point in their lives, they decided to perform some action, NOT perform some action, or allow some issue to continue to exist. They did this until such time as they lost the ability to, or gave up on the ability to continue being productive in our society.
Sad? Yes. The government’s problem? No. The result of their own wrongdoing? Absolutely.
Remember this definition.
“Wrongdoing”
Noun
Behavior or action that is wrong.
(Dictionary.com)
I believe that all will agree that any action that you take, any action that you fail to take, that causes you to become homeless, would fall under that category of an “Action that is wrong.”
Whether that action, that behavior is spending outside of the budget, drinking too much, picking up that crack pipe, or not discontinuing the use of a prescription medicine when that use becomes detrimental to one’s well being. They made that choice; they did or did not perform that action that caused their condition.
My opponent has spent copious amounts of time lamenting how it is difficult to impossible for the homeless to obtain employment. I present to you that this is not the debate. The debate is whether or not they are victims of their own wrongdoing. My opponent related at length the specifics of a certain prescription medicine and how difficult it is to break that addiction. Yet, at some point the individual could have put it down and sought help “before” losing everything and becoming one of the homeless we are debating.
Many that reflect upon what has been written here will, as my opponent, feel emotional about the plight these people suffer. I caution you against allowing that to be the basis for any actions you may consider in support of assisting the effort to solve this problem. Emotions are the antipathy of correct actions. Emotions have little value in the pursuit of solutions, especially those that are as convoluted and difficult as this.
I have presented factual and supported evidence and explained my stance on this issue. Although each of us must be expected to decide such things for ourselves, the inescapable fact remains that each homeless person, did at some point in their lives, make that one, two or more decisions that created their environment.
The facts remain that the large majority of homeless are only in that situation for a limited period of time. They improve their living conditions on their own. Thus further establishing my point for me.
The fact remains that you can not possibly become an addict, an alcoholic or criminal without making the decision to drink, use narcotics or break the law. Those decisions fall under the definition of wrongdoing. There by again establishing my point for me.
When one is out enjoying the wonders this country has to offer, it is impossible to see a homeless person and not feel emotional about their plight. The emotions that you feel will not correct their condition on any permanent basis. They must be instructed in how to not place themselves in that situation as much as they must be helped out of it.
The most effective solution is to teach them what they did wrong, what actions they took that caused them to be homeless and then teach them to not do it again.
Enable them to help themselves.
Semper
As the light turns to dark. All great things have to come to an end, and it is my unfortunate responsibility to finish this debate off. One last
time I have to thank my opponent for his efforts. As I read his posts I find myself rooting more and more for him, then I have to remind myself that
it is I he is looking into the eyes of from across the ring.
Time for one last spin.
My opponent acknowledges an issue that has a stranglehold on the issue we are discussing. Emotions. It is human nature to feel for a victim. When somebody suffers, one can not help but feel for them. Emotion can cloud our judgment on many issues. If your family is the victim of a specific crime, you may carry a certain bias towards any assailants of the crime in the future. However, my first hand experience has opened my eyes to the issue rather than cloud my judgment. My experience with homeless individuals has allowed me to put a face on those in need, and realize that this could happen to any one of us. To think that the individual themself is solely responsible for their situation is a very naive stereotype.
What my opponent fails to acknowledge is that an addiction is a disease. He says that the individual makes a decision at some point to fuel their disease. But when an individual develops an addiction through a completely legal prescription, that was consumed as directed, one can not be blamed for the addiction that developed. I believe my opponent would do his own argument some serious justification if he were to acknowledge this as a disease rather than a personal decision.
In this, my closing statement, I have to take our attention and focus it on the majority of homeless individuals worldwide. My opponent has openly ignored my statements, my figures, and my links, and continued to say that "over-nighters" are the majority of homeless individuals. That may be the case for Americans, but we are not talking about Americans. So you can see that his sites, facts, and statistics are completely moot to the situation at hand.
■ Genocide
■ War
■ Poverty
■ Society
These are all of the biggest contributors to homelessness. It is quite clear that my opponent is not willing to tackle these items because there is absolutely no defense to their validity. He has provided links, to which I have counteracted with factual information that completely undermines his stance. I have actually proven that, what my opponent has said, to be false. Has my opponent been able to take my words and beyond a reasonable doubt conclude them to be false?
No, he has not. It is not a discredit to my worthy opponent, but it has been his strategy. I have produced facts that can not be disputed. Genocide survivors, civilians during war, and victims of poverty severely outweigh the number of drug abusers, alcoholics, and evicts worldwide.
I wish to quote one portion of my opponents efforts, as this final attempt needs to be acknowledged.
And one final time I have to ask the question that you have avoided for so long now. What decision has victims of war, genocide, and poverty had to make on their ordeal? When did the citizens of Darfur make a decision to be wiped off the face of the earth?
By my opponents own admission, I have counteracted his points. Where has my opponent counteracted what I have said? Other than deploy a strategy to ignore the irrefutable evidence, my opponent has done little to face the arguments I have made.
You can see in this quote, that my opponent has directed his attention on the homeless within his own country. Nowhere in the topic, that we are discussing, does it say "American Homeless". Homeless Individuals are what we are discussing, and every homeless person worldwide is included. This narrow approach can not be overlooked.
I am not here to say Socialism is the way to go. I am not here to say Conservatism needs an adjustment. I am merely trying to shine some light on those who need a helping hand. Homelessness is an issue that has been growing and growing, and with the population of our planet on a steady incline, it may become a bigger issue in the not too distant future. Rather than passing judgment, pass a helping hand. Rather than stepping over them, step up to help them.
The true face of homelessness is scarred with war, not drugs. These individuals are victims, and they do not deserve our ridicule. Whether it is a white man in Times Square or an orphan female in Darfur, they are in need of our help.
I conclude this with a friendly, yet firm, handshake between my opponent and I. The respect I had for you before this debate has increased tenfold.
I tip my hat and exit stage right.
Time for one last spin.
My opponent acknowledges an issue that has a stranglehold on the issue we are discussing. Emotions. It is human nature to feel for a victim. When somebody suffers, one can not help but feel for them. Emotion can cloud our judgment on many issues. If your family is the victim of a specific crime, you may carry a certain bias towards any assailants of the crime in the future. However, my first hand experience has opened my eyes to the issue rather than cloud my judgment. My experience with homeless individuals has allowed me to put a face on those in need, and realize that this could happen to any one of us. To think that the individual themself is solely responsible for their situation is a very naive stereotype.
What my opponent fails to acknowledge is that an addiction is a disease. He says that the individual makes a decision at some point to fuel their disease. But when an individual develops an addiction through a completely legal prescription, that was consumed as directed, one can not be blamed for the addiction that developed. I believe my opponent would do his own argument some serious justification if he were to acknowledge this as a disease rather than a personal decision.
In this, my closing statement, I have to take our attention and focus it on the majority of homeless individuals worldwide. My opponent has openly ignored my statements, my figures, and my links, and continued to say that "over-nighters" are the majority of homeless individuals. That may be the case for Americans, but we are not talking about Americans. So you can see that his sites, facts, and statistics are completely moot to the situation at hand.
■ Genocide
■ War
■ Poverty
■ Society
These are all of the biggest contributors to homelessness. It is quite clear that my opponent is not willing to tackle these items because there is absolutely no defense to their validity. He has provided links, to which I have counteracted with factual information that completely undermines his stance. I have actually proven that, what my opponent has said, to be false. Has my opponent been able to take my words and beyond a reasonable doubt conclude them to be false?
No, he has not. It is not a discredit to my worthy opponent, but it has been his strategy. I have produced facts that can not be disputed. Genocide survivors, civilians during war, and victims of poverty severely outweigh the number of drug abusers, alcoholics, and evicts worldwide.
I wish to quote one portion of my opponents efforts, as this final attempt needs to be acknowledged.
With the rare exception, the person that finds themselves homeless, does so because at some point in their lives, they decided to perform some action, NOT perform some action, or allow some issue to continue to exist.
And one final time I have to ask the question that you have avoided for so long now. What decision has victims of war, genocide, and poverty had to make on their ordeal? When did the citizens of Darfur make a decision to be wiped off the face of the earth?
By my opponents own admission, I have counteracted his points. Where has my opponent counteracted what I have said? Other than deploy a strategy to ignore the irrefutable evidence, my opponent has done little to face the arguments I have made.
The issues that have created the current Homeless situation in this country are simply and succinctly the result of actions taken by individuals without due regard for the consequences of those actions.
You can see in this quote, that my opponent has directed his attention on the homeless within his own country. Nowhere in the topic, that we are discussing, does it say "American Homeless". Homeless Individuals are what we are discussing, and every homeless person worldwide is included. This narrow approach can not be overlooked.
I am not here to say Socialism is the way to go. I am not here to say Conservatism needs an adjustment. I am merely trying to shine some light on those who need a helping hand. Homelessness is an issue that has been growing and growing, and with the population of our planet on a steady incline, it may become a bigger issue in the not too distant future. Rather than passing judgment, pass a helping hand. Rather than stepping over them, step up to help them.
The true face of homelessness is scarred with war, not drugs. These individuals are victims, and they do not deserve our ridicule. Whether it is a white man in Times Square or an orphan female in Darfur, they are in need of our help.
I conclude this with a friendly, yet firm, handshake between my opponent and I. The respect I had for you before this debate has increased tenfold.
I tip my hat and exit stage right.
The Debate Is Finished!
And now I'm consulting with the secret judges (there's more than one) to find out what their verdict is.
Results to follow later today...
And now I'm consulting with the secret judges (there's more than one) to find out what their verdict is.
Results to follow later today...
The Judges Have Spoken!
There were actually two judges, and they both ruled as follows:
1. semperfortis made the more convincing argument.
2. It was a close enough contest and a broad enough topic that both judges suggested they would like to see a rematch.
Of course, as is the custom in Head-2-Head, all participants will share equally in the debate prize.
Thus I have awarded each of you 20,000 PTS Points for this excellent thread.
In addition to that, this debate will be an eligible candidate for the Big Debate Contest Grand Prize -- once we work out some things behind the scenes (please pardon our dust).
And um... when you've had a chance to recharge your batteries, I wouldn't mind seeing a rematch myself.
Nicely done.
(Oh and the thread is now open to comments from any interested Fighter or staff member).
[edit on 1/22/2007 by Majic]
There were actually two judges, and they both ruled as follows:
1. semperfortis made the more convincing argument.
2. It was a close enough contest and a broad enough topic that both judges suggested they would like to see a rematch.
Of course, as is the custom in Head-2-Head, all participants will share equally in the debate prize.
Thus I have awarded each of you 20,000 PTS Points for this excellent thread.
In addition to that, this debate will be an eligible candidate for the Big Debate Contest Grand Prize -- once we work out some things behind the scenes (please pardon our dust).
And um... when you've had a chance to recharge your batteries, I wouldn't mind seeing a rematch myself.
Nicely done.
(Oh and the thread is now open to comments from any interested Fighter or staff member).
[edit on 1/22/2007 by Majic]
semper, I tip my hat to you my friend and applaud your victory.
In the early going, I was really second guessing this whole approach and was like, "Damn.. I'm really in over my head!" You brought it and wasted no time. I thought I took the upper hand as the debate progressed, but it is clear I am in a position of bias.
Like the last debate, there are no losers. I am honored to of taken part in this debate, and I look forward to the next round.
This debate allowed me the opportunity to hear some honest feedback from members I've never met. A few stories were shared and I have semper, and the H2H Forum to thank for it. Members have shared some first hand accounts, and it was very interesting to discuss their stories.
So one final time my friend, Congrats!
In the early going, I was really second guessing this whole approach and was like, "Damn.. I'm really in over my head!" You brought it and wasted no time. I thought I took the upper hand as the debate progressed, but it is clear I am in a position of bias.
Like the last debate, there are no losers. I am honored to of taken part in this debate, and I look forward to the next round.
This debate allowed me the opportunity to hear some honest feedback from members I've never met. A few stories were shared and I have semper, and the H2H Forum to thank for it. Members have shared some first hand accounts, and it was very interesting to discuss their stories.
So one final time my friend, Congrats!
Well... my friend...
No one is as surprised as me...
I thought I put up a good fight, but I was also very impressed with the passion that you put into this debate.
You obviously have very deep feelings for this issue.
I believe that our continued communication via U2U, was one thing that made this so much more enjoyable than just regular posting...
ps..
I am always up for a rematch..
Good Job Chissler and thanks for the compliments...
Semper
No one is as surprised as me...
I thought I put up a good fight, but I was also very impressed with the passion that you put into this debate.
You obviously have very deep feelings for this issue.
I believe that our continued communication via U2U, was one thing that made this so much more enjoyable than just regular posting...
ps..
I am always up for a rematch..
Good Job Chissler and thanks for the compliments...
Semper
new topics
-
The mysterious death of Aileen Conway
General Chit Chat: 1 hours ago -
Half-Life 2 is 20 Years Old - its Also Free on Steam until the 18th
Video Games: 5 hours ago -
Does the Trump win mean No More Taylor Swift??
Politicians & People: 8 hours ago -
Trump-appointed judge blocks Biden administration overtime rule
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 10 hours ago
top topics
-
Don't cry do Cryo instead
General Chit Chat: 16 hours ago, 12 flags -
Does the Trump win mean No More Taylor Swift??
Politicians & People: 8 hours ago, 12 flags -
Trump-appointed judge blocks Biden administration overtime rule
Social Issues and Civil Unrest: 10 hours ago, 8 flags -
The mysterious death of Aileen Conway
General Chit Chat: 1 hours ago, 5 flags -
Half-Life 2 is 20 Years Old - its Also Free on Steam until the 18th
Video Games: 5 hours ago, 1 flags
active topics
-
President-elect TRUMP Picks MATT GAETZ for his ATTORNEY GENERAL - High Level PANIC Ensues.
2024 Elections • 80 • : RickinVa -
WATCH LIVE: US Congress hearing on UFOs, unidentified anomalous phenomena
Aliens and UFOs • 99 • : DaydreamerX -
The mysterious death of Aileen Conway
General Chit Chat • 1 • : DAVID64 -
President-Elect DONALD TRUMP's 2nd-Term Administration Takes Shape.
Political Ideology • 209 • : EyeoftheHurricane -
Tariffs all around, Except for ...
Dreams & Predictions • 29 • : KnowItAllKnowNothin -
Does the Trump win mean No More Taylor Swift??
Politicians & People • 45 • : Oldcarpy2 -
Mike Tyson returns 11-15-24
World Sports • 67 • : argentus -
The art of being offended
Social Issues and Civil Unrest • 52 • : argentus -
Mood Music Part VI
Music • 3703 • : underpass61 -
Old School Punk
Music • 560 • : underpass61
7