Debate: All people are created equal, and I am square

It can be explained in terms of natural human rights. There can be no justice without equality. As human beings, apart from the biological differences between men and women, there is no evidence that points to inequality, and they are all proud of the earth, and they all share common rights and obligations. The Olympic spirit can be exemplified

Jane Eyre said to Robert: "If God gives me wealth and beauty, I will make it difficult for you to leave me, just as it is difficult for me to leave you now."

God didn't do that, and our souls were equal, as if the two of us walked through the grave and stood at God's feet, equal to each other – as it was! "Yes, our souls are equal, our minds are unlimited, we can be imaginative, whimsical, and let our minds wander in the vast starry sky. I think it's true equality!

When the position of society, occupation, or love is all hidden, we live in the world equally. Albert Einstein said that we all depend on the labor of others to survive. Therefore we are all equal.

The so-called distinction between high and low is only a secular evaluation. Only those who are truly noble in soul will understand that as a human being, we are equal and treat everyone equally.

Not only are all human beings created equal, but they also have their own strengths. There is no one who can do everything, and there is no one who is good for nothing. The ruler is short, and the inch is long.

No matter how "noble" a person is, he has his fatal weakness, and no matter how "lowly" a person is, he has difficulties in others. If we can understand this truth, then we will not be proud of the laurels other than the corpse, nor will we be submissive because of the humble name, so that we can truly reach the highest state of life without being frightened. I appreciate the quote:

Although I am poor, our spirits are equal, and our souls will all pass through the grave to stand before God. "All men are born free and equal, so why do we think who is more "noble" than whom?And why do you think who is "inferior" to whom?

Yes, we are all created equal. Therefore, I never despise the declining, nor do I despise the successful. I think we are equal.

It's important to know what the other side is going to refute you from, or what they're going to base their arguments on. Therefore, when you make your arguments, you should try to set the other party's possible arguments under the premise of your arguments. In this way, we can take the lead in this debate.

I have a different understanding of your equality, if the world is unbalanced, the tilt of power will be extinct long ago. Just one atom structure balance is broken, and a huge amount of energy is released. The equality of our people is only a social status, and it is only a social force.

That kind of unequal status happens to be relative to tens of millions of civilians, and it is balanced. That imbalance is a legitimate phenomenon in this historical context. In every era, the relationship between people is constantly changing, and what the textbooks talk about is the relationship of production.

But at least from ancient times to the present, people's unequal status has been constantly developing in a good direction. From primitive people, to slaves, to feudal peasants, to workers. There is no doubt that social forces are diverging among the people.

But now the imbalance is absolute. No one can transcend history. Only the internal contradictions of the people can destroy this current inequality.

Don't ask me what the difference is between being born a big official, a very rich man, etc. These are strengths and resources. )

If you are positive, let alone the equality of social forces. Pull equality far away, pull it to objective things, and pull it to the height of balance. Extend the objective law of equilibrium.

When it comes to the essence of human beings and the universe, let's ask what is the difference between Mars and Mercury? Just bigger? There is as much truth as there is truth.

The debates are all like this. I don't say right because I don't have any feelings for equality, that is, I don't feel it. Debate is.

The idle eggs hurt and made it.

I believe that all debates are the result of different understandings of the meaning of concepts. In other words, he looks at this issue from his own standpoint and perspective. The so-called "horizontal view is a peak on the side of the ridge, and the height of the distance is different" is also.

In the case of your argument, whether I am a pro or con side, I can come up with a whole bunch of arguments that support my argument and are all correct from my point of view. Maybe then the other party immediately said, my argument is not comprehensive, ignore something. That's when he comes up with his own arguments (what I ignore, what he stands for) to refute me.

In fact, we all "don't know the true face of Lushan, only because we are in this mountain". The conclusion after the argument is not absolutely correct, but only the most advantageous option after weighing the pros and cons.

People are born equal! Whether it's a man or a woman, they're all full of life, and no one can live without anyone, right? (Otherwise, how could there be a next generation?) ）

People are inherently equal, and men can do many things, but there are also things they can't do, and only women can do these things. Isn't it? People are equal and at the same time complementary.

I'm square.

People are born unequal. In ancient times, people had a way to distinguish whether the fetus was male or female, and the female was often killed. In this way, they are equal before they are born.

Although equality between men and women is now advocated. But there are some villages where there is still a preference for sons. Or at school it is often the rich who look down on the poor students and bully them.

The problem of patriarchal preference is illustrated by the problem of foot binding. I'm the opposite--

Fight is not created equal. Some people are born with disabilities, some people are unflawed; Some people have tens of millions of assets, and some people have nothing; Some families are harmonious, while others have broken families. Family background and status do not affect the strokes of the word equality all the time.

...Argue? You didn't argue.

I'm the opposite--Just one question. You've made it impossible for you to argue.

Your IQ is: 120The IQ of so-and-so is: 80

You're from a similar family. The pros and cons of parents are similar.

How do you argue ?..All men are created equal.

People are born to death. Even time. , all of which are unequal.

Homosexuals. You don't have to argue.

From a philosophical point of view, this view is relative, and it is one of the best aspirations of mankind, and it is also the most beautiful aspiration of the least demand for equality. It is a pity that the wish is only the wish after all, the proposition of human society is the absolute in the relative, inequality is its center, and the only way to achieve this equality is to wait until the proposition is resolved.

Man is born with the same life, and this is the most basic.

There is no life. Then it's nothing.

People are born with the same sun, the same air.

Without them, that life would soon be over.

Equality, at least we were all born, better than stillborn, right?

This is indeed tricky, depending on how this equality is understood. Equality is multifaceted! Is it status? Fame? Looks? Weight? Or is it the cultivation of the future? Degree? Life span?..

Is it right here? It's not appropriate, give it to me, and I'll be the opposite. What do you think?

All Men Are Created Equal The problem on the opposite side of the debate is that all men are not equal.

However, opponents of the other side thus conclude that life is equal. Note that this is not the birth of equality, but equality after birth, achieved through hard struggle. Therefore, we believe that your premise is wrong!

That is, when a person is born, the political, economic, and cultural treatment given to him by society is equal, both material and spiritual. However, this is not the case. The same two newborns, one was born in the Swedish palace and the other in the war in Somalia, it is not known when the bomb was dropped, he died, and even his life does not guarantee it.

Do you still think that they are treated equally?

In fact, people are born unequal.

First of all, people do not live equally due to their unequal ownership of natural and social resources, i.e., geographical environment, economic level, and cultural patterns:

Some people have the resources to enjoy when they are sick, but some people can't. Somalia and Sweden, for example, have no peace, no health care, no legal protection. Will people born in Sweden and Somalia be equal?

Secondly, resources are more or less, leading to unequal treatment. China clearly stipulates that every citizen has the right to receive nine years of compulsory education. However, for students, the school teachers are strong and advanced hardware facilities, but the other is weak and lacking, does not equal such an educational ruinous opportunity?

Moreover, it is not an illusion that life is not equal from the realization of the value of life. We all want to live equally. It's human nature.

We cannot bear reproach. But in reality, precisely because we know that life is not equal, we will only fight for it, and we will seek higher equality!

The other side believes that there is no absolute equality in the world, so today we are talking about relative equality, but this relative distance is too far. So, life is not equal. Thank you!

1.It is suggested to start from the ideological aspect, the material determines the consciousness, and the working people create wealth.

2.First of all, teaching is not just a profession, which is a kind of money worship. A lot of this from the dedication, their own play some praise.

3.A person is a minority and has no connection to the family name and other things in life and learning, so the bonus point policy is allowed. And then there are very few people who can really enjoy the extra points.

It is better to say that discussing the issue of equality requires both sides to have some common ground, such as a world view, an outlook on life, and values. Otherwise, there will never be any result.

Attention landlord: If you want to be square, you must avoid reality in the general sense, because reality is unequal.

Your argument is what to mean by equality.

Yes, there are high and low births, rich and poor, but the so-called equality is not only something as simple as money and material things. Especially in our progressive civilized world, the concept of equality has long been deeply rooted in the hearts of the people. It can be said that the most direct and typical influences are the women's movement, the national movement, and the class movement.

It is precisely because we believe in equality that we have today's equality between men and women, national independence, and the collapse of the feudal system. Black Obama has become a **, isn't it the best proof that he is born equal?

No matter how the opponent attacks, you remember one thing.

It is important to emphasize that there are countless inequalities in reality, but the truth is that all men are created equal!! Only by not forgetting this point can our social system progress and have the beautiful society we have now.

Finally, I really think: in fact, I think all people are unequal, it's just too unequal. But it is precisely because of this that everyone has a faint desire for equality in their hearts, and when you can draw out the heartfelt wishes of both sides, and affect this justice to everyone on the field and make their blood boil, you will win.

Inequality is a fact, and equality is the noble idea of truth, goodness, and beauty.

I almost cried when I saw Obama elected, and I was really touched because it made me see the tolerance of American culture and the progress of human thought. Our society is a little closer to equality.

Let's work backwards from the logical relationship of "what you want is what you can't get".

I ask you: Is equality what we preach?

That is to say, the degree of "equality" accepted by the majority has not yet been able to reach the scope of "majority" in our country.

This suitable range --- work, discussions, opportunities, education, competition for survival, etc.

However, there is an idealist worldview that exists in the realm of spiritual thought (here I would admit the materialist dominance of our country).

For example, beliefs, religions, traditional moral values, altruistic happiness theory, 、、、

These self-spiritual satisfactions are imbued with a strong sense of individuality.

In these processes, the parties can ignore the "feelings of inequality" that are in opposition to the "concept of equality" that exists in the surrounding society and applies to the "majority of people".

That is, in the eyes of these people.

Equality is determined by the degree of one's belief and the degree of self-satisfaction ...

There is also a personal joy, anger and sorrow from the living body, natural man, life is only once Generally speaking, everyone is fair!

Rich people can only eat one meal a day, and the wonderful feeling of eating a meal of seafood for the poor is equivalent to what the rich get for spending money on a luxury cruise ship.

Equality is also equality, and inequality is not equal. People only have a lifetime, decades, and they have to experience birth, old age, sickness and death, which is an equal place. Everyone is born, and sometimes his overall situation has been decided, and the nobility of birth has created his inequality.