Solyndra was a lost bet, but there are always risks

Reasons to agree:

1. “Hindsight is always 20-20,” Obama told George Stephanopoulos of ABC News in October of 2011. “It went through the regular review process. And people felt like this was a good bet.” Solyndra didn’t work out, but that’s the kind of risk the United States must take to compete with countries like China that subsidize solar power.

Reasons to disagree:

1. The economy shouldn't be investing in green economy when we are in debt. 


2. Their are no risks when the federal government supports basic fundamental research that results in greater general understanding. There was no need for risks like Solyndra. 

Probable interest of those who agree:

1. 
   

Probable interest of those who disagree:

1. 
   

Common Interest

1. 
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

The Bush taxes were bad

Reasons to agree:

1. The Bush taxes only helped the very wealthy.


2. The Bush taxes contributed to the US national debt. 


3. John Feehery. "Opinion: Obama’s fatal missteps." The Hill. October 3rd, 2011: "5. Signed an extension of President Bush’s tax cuts: After campaigning against and complaining about George W. Bush’s tax cuts for the rich, Obama meekly signed a two-year extension of those same tax cuts. By reversing course, Obama did three things. He exposed himself as a man who will blink when put to the test. He made the deficit situation much worse. He has not in any way, shape or form put himself in a stronger rhetorical position for his reelection. He is making the same ineffective arguments that he made last year, and it will likely yield the same result."

Reasons to disagree:

1.  

Probable interest of those who agree:

1. 
   

Probable interest of those who disagree:

1. 
   

Common Interest

1. 
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

True...

When a religious belief causes you to treat a loved one with anger or coldness it's not a church to anymore, it's a cult -3

Images That agree

This Mormon Gags has some truth to it, but Science has also created nuclear weapons... Perhaps the benefits of modernism is still being debated... -Nuclear weapons, -pollution, -global warming... The biggest positive I see is this, from The Oxford Guide to Modern Science: "... If you imagine a wave of humanity spreading outward at 1% of the speed of light, it will cross the entire Milky Way Galaxy in 8 million years, to occupy billions of suitable niches not already claimed by living things. In that time-scale, there is no great rush, unless it is to start the process before demoralization, destruction or extinction closes the present launch window for the human breakout into space". Does that blow your mind? It does mine. So the real question is who is going to help us not destroy each other more: prophets, or scientist? Scientist give us power, but prophets (should) teach us how to use it. For those who have missed my Romney Rants: If the fruits of Joseph Smith are that a personal from a religious minority in the most powerful country on the planet can get elected as president, then perhaps he will assist in creating a more stable planet, that can make it to the stars...

Polygamy leaves some men with no women to marry +3

Reasons to agree: +3

1. When one man marries two women, some other man marries no woman. When one man marries three women, two other men don't marry. When one man marries four women, three other men don't marry. Monogamy gives everyone a shot at marriage. Polygyny, by contrast, is a zero-sum game that skews the marriage market so that some men marry at the expense of others.China and India have a lot of sex-selective abortion, leaving more men than women. 


2. We already have too many unmarried men. China and India have some sex-selective abortion and infanticide, leaving too many men. 


3. By the year 2020 extra men will make up 12 to 15 percent of the young adult male population in China and India. 

Reasons to disagree

1.   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 3

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: 3



Podcast that agree:

1. http://mormonstories.org/sons-of-perdition-the-lost-boys-of-the-flds-church/

Scriptures that agree

1. 
   

Scriptures that disagree

1. 
   

Images That agree:

Images That disagree:



Interest of those who agree

1. Group identification

Interest of those who disagree

1. Group identification

Common Interest

Opposing Interest





Videos That agree

Videos That disagree



Website that agree

Websites that disagree



Related arguments:



Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Polygamy is bad +4

Reasons to agree

1. Polygamy leaves some men with no women to marry. +3 When some men don't have viable chances of marriage, it is bad for society. 

Reasons to disagree

1.  

Scriptures that agree

1. 
   

Scriptures that disagree

1. 
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 1

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 3

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: +4

Images That agree

Images That disagree



Interest of those who agree

Interest of those who disagree



Common Interest

Opposing Interest





Videos That agree

Videos That disagree



Website that agree

Websites that disagree



Related arguments:



Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Reform

We should require that our politicians use a transparent decision making process, in which they clearly outline the reasons voted for a bill, and the reasons they hesitated voting for a bill. This process works well for the court system, which is required to give a majority and minority opinion, after they vote. It also works in engineering classes, where students are not only required to get the right answer, but are required to show their work, indicating to the professor how they came to their conclusion. Currently, we don't even require them to pretend that they are acting in our interest by having a formal procedure that they account and explain their actions.

• There are many ways we could expose the decision making progress to the light of transparency. For each vote we could require that politicians:
• pass tests on subjects that affect their vote. This will support transparency by letting us know if our politicians are even informed or not. If they know nothing about anything, they will no longer be able to keep their ignorance hid from us.
• pass a lie detector test. It is wrong to use lie detectors on normal people, but politicians do not have the right to lie to us. For a politician's vote to count they should have to indicate that they:
• believe their action will help the country in the long run, and not just get them re-elected, and that they are going to make the right decision for the country.  
• indicate on a scale of 1-10 how much they agreed with major argument affecting their vote. For many of us the reason that a politician voted to make a bill into law is just as important as the way they voted.
• rank the importance of the interest of those who will be affected by their votes.
• write their own speeches. We want to know what someone believes not what their handlers believe.  The difficult mental exercise of writing speeches is the only way to find out what you really believe. The Gettysburg address helped transform our nation, but thinking about the man who wrote it is what allows us to trust our leaders. We can't trust any of our leaders since they all stopped writing their own speeches. They are actors. They are empty suits. They are zombies. We are stupid to allow this charade to continue, in which we pretend to improve our country by continuing to vote for politicians who pretend to be people.
• give book reports once a year on the most important book they think they read that year. Real people with real ideas who are willing to explain themselves clearly are explaining the problems that we face, and are explaining how we can fix our problems. Politicians should no longer be allowed to pretend that they are the experts.
• Debate real experts. We don't force politicians to face down real experts, but we do allow them to go on C-Span so they can make ridiculous self serving misrepresented speeches, in which they would never dare treat each other unkindly, because they would be ostracized from their good old boy club.

We should get out of Afghanistan as soon as possible

Reasons to agree:

1. We will not succeed in trying to modernize countries that want to live in the 12th century. 


2. We can't force other countries to want Democracy. If it doesn't seem like something they want, then we aren't going to convince them. It is the 21st centery. They have access to all the books, data, and examples of history that we do. Let them figure it out themselves.


3. We can bomb terrorist training camps from 1 mile up in the sky. 


4. We killed Osama Bin Laden. 

Reasons to disagree:

1.  

Probable interest of those who agree:

1. 
   
   

Probable interest of those who disagree:

1. 
   
   

Common Interest

1. 
   
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   
   

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

The president was right to ensure that hospitals that want federal funds allow gay partners to have the same rights as married couples

Background: The President issued a Presidential Memorandum directing the HHS Secretary to ensure that those hospitals that receive Medicare and Medicaid funds will give gay and lesbian patients and their families the compassion, dignity and respect they deserve in difficult times, as well as widows and widowers with no children, members of religious orders, and others whom otherwise may not have been able to receive visits from good friends and loved ones who are not immediate relatives, or select them to make decisions on their behalf in case of incapacitation.





Reasons to agree:

1. The separation of church and state requires that you allow gay couples to arrange their lives as they wish. A gay person's partner should have similar life and death decision making preferences as a heterosexual partner. 

Reasons to disagree:

1.  

Probable interest of those who agree:

1. 
   
   

Probable interest of those who disagree:

1. 
   
   

Common Interest

1. 
   
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   
   

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change

Gays should be allowed to serve openly in the military

Reasons to agree:

1. 
   
   

Reasons to disagree:

1.  Front operating field combatants group dynamics should not include romance. 


2. This is a debate about soldiers being required to defend their country while living and rooming in close quarters with each other. It is a fact that their effectiveness depends on mutual trust and uncomplicated camaraderie. Sexual relations or tension between soldiers, of whatever gender, undermines this bond. Every man must trust one another without sexual tensions at high levels.

Probable interest of those who agree:

1. 
   
   

Probable interest of those who disagree:

1. 
   
   

Common Interest

1. 
   
   

Opposing Interest

1.  

Images That agree

1.   

Images That disagree

1. 
   
   

Videos That agree

1.  

Videos That disagree

1.  

Website that agree

1. 
   
   

Websites that disagree

1.  

Related arguments:

1. 
   
   

Score:

# of reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to disagree: -0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to agree: 0

# of reasons to agree with reasons to disagree: -0

Total Idea Score: 0

Don't like the score? It is easy to change the score. Just post a reason to agree or disagree with the overall idea, or any of the reasons and the score will change