• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Convince me I am wrong

gfm7175 said:
Philosophy is the study of how and why we reason. It involves making your own arguments... The only rule of Philosophy is that you cannot make use of outside sources.
Click to expand...

Try again. Lmao
 
Logical1 said:
Sanctuary cities are actually guilty of harboring criminals. That is against the law. If a private citizen did it they would be arrested.
Click to expand...

Is it? The federal government only has powers of naturalization when it comes to illigals. If Cali and others are not trying to make them citizens then would it not fall under the tenth amendment?
 
srexob715 said:
You get so angry when you are defeated. Lmao
Click to expand...
I am actually quite happy right now...

The thread topic is about sanctuary cities harboring criminals (and how that is against the law for private citizens, yet these sanctuary cities are doing it).

Do you have anything to add to this discussion?

What are YOUR thoughts on sanctuary cities?
 
gfm7175 said:
You asked where do you find it... I told you that it isn't hiding anywhere... The axioms are available for all to see.
Click to expand...

Really? How does one see axioms? How are they available? Do you see them with your eyes? What is an axiom? What is the source of axioms?
 
gfm7175 said:
Philosophy is the study of how and why we reason. It involves making your own arguments... The only rule of Philosophy is that you cannot make use of outside sources.
Click to expand...

That is not what philosophy is. That is how you define philosophy. Because it is your definition, I will refer to it as schmilosophy. In fact, for all the words you have taken and made up your own definitions I will add a "schm" to them to distinguish which definition I am referring to. You did not invent the word philosophy nor its definition. You have invented schmilosophy.

So first off, how can schmilosophy be a study but only come from your own arguments? What exactly is it studying if it can only come from each individual and each individual will have arguments with no way to determine the validity of the arguments? What exactly is being studied by whom? How can there be a rule of schmilosophy if we all can have our own arguments? Who determined this one rule of schmilosophy? Did you just make it up? Where did this rule originate? Where and when did schmilosophy originate?
 
gfm7175 said:
I am actually quite happy right now...

The thread topic is about sanctuary cities harboring criminals (and how that is against the law for private citizens, yet these sanctuary cities are doing it).

Do you have anything to add to this discussion?

What are YOUR thoughts on sanctuary cities?
Click to expand...

These cities are not harboring anyone. They do not hide or harbor anyone from ICE. They simply don't report individuals to ICE in situations where it would hinder local law enforcement from focusing on their job of fighting local crime.
 
JackA said:
Sanctuary cities are about local government minding its own affairs and telling the federal government to stay away, what conservatives believe is the way it should be.
Click to expand...

In other words, The Constitution can go to heck?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom