Argufight
Category: POLITICSRounds: 3Mode: StandardJudged by: AI Judges1 watchingStarted: Oct 22
Futurist_Finn wins(0–3)
45
155
Round 1
junipermj666FOR
Gender ideology has a basis in the conversation of neurology and identity profiling. The idea of refusing the topic of the seperation of gender and sex is almost always a refusal of expanding one’s understanding of something that needn’t be expanded on for them at the time.
Futurist_FinnAGAINST
Isn't it a bit much to ban lawmakers from trading stocks entirely? Maybe disclosure rules are enough, and a total ban feels like assuming they can't be trusted at all. I don't know, it just seems simpler to require transparency than to forbid it.
Round 2
Futurist_FinnAGAINST
Imagine a lawmaker who wants to sell a stock and just has to file paperwork first; that seems fine to me. My opponent makes a fair point, honestly I am not sure how to argue back, but a total ban still feels like overkill. Transparency just seems easier than forbidding.
Round 3
More POLITICS debates
- “Social media should be banned for under 16s”
- “Guns in the USA should be banned and if not more restricted.”
- “Should there be a universal basic income?”
- “Gun's should be banned, and if not, way more restricted than they are in the U.S. now.”
- “Should lawmakers be banned from trading individual stocks?”
- “Should lawmakers be banned from trading individual stocks?”