︵‿୨♡ Ｊｕｌｉｅｔｔｅ ♡୧‿︵’s Comments (group member since Jun 19, 2025)

︵‿୨♡ Ｊｕｌｉｅｔｔｅ ♡୧‿︵’s comments from the The Debate Club group.

I mean we have scientific proof that vaccines work so I would say absolutely, especially for children since they can get protected. And yes, there are risks. Like everywhere in life. In the end it is a personal decision that everyone has to take for themselves. I don't think one should get forced to get vaccinated or vaccinate their children, even though I get where this is coming from.

I don't think there can be an objectively morally right party. Everyone has an individual moral compass and therefore having an objectively morally right party to vote for is impossible.

gia wrote: "hello? no. it would be traumatizing even for the person watching. cmon guys i thought we left this in the 1600s when we burned women who didnt fit into a certain standard for being 'witches.'"

👏 absolutely

No, absolutely not. Public executions are not just disgusting and dangerous, but also a violation of human dignity in my opinion. The moment of death is maybe the most private in ones lifetime and shouldn’t be open to the public. The question is: What would be advantage of public executions? And I can’t find any advantage here. So I don’t see any necessity for it, to be honest. Like Sky already mentioned, it makes a difference if the executions were broadcasted or in a public place. Also, how could you assure that no child would ever see that? You simply couldn’t. So, like Sai already said, it would cause more harm than good. And I personally question death penalty generally. But this is off topic.

Sai :) wrote: "sieraqvt🇻🇳 semi-ia (school) wrote: "i agree! though we shouldn't shame them for caring this time, we should shame them for not caring all those other times"

absolutely!

and NOBODY should celebrate this. I totally disagreed with his opinions, but like the student said, we're all human beings, and nobody in this world should be harmed or killed because of their beliefs.

yes, absolutely. no one deserves that.

absolutely

hey, have you guys heard that Trump wants to rebrand the Pentagon as department of war?
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/cgr...
I think it is extremely concerning. What are your thoughts about it?

you're absolutely right.

I absolutely agree with alice, this would be the best. this debate is very interesting to me too, since I'm from Europe and generally have wayy stricter gun laws. the problem I see is that people do already own these guns/weapons. so what to do with these guns? does everybody have to hand their weapons over to the state? cause I think this would be impossible. or do the people that already own a weapon have the right to keep their guns? but then, the new laws would be basically useless, wouldn't they? I don't really have a solution for this problem besides, maybe making it more difficult to buy guns.

what makes him a good president in your opinion? I'm just honestly interested

I agree that people being forced to do this work is a big problem, but making it illegal would not stop people from being forced into sex work. A prohibition would not stop sex work from being offered, rather stop legal, free sex work. So, in my opinion, prohibiting sex work does not help these people. That's why I would say it should be legal, but we should take action in order to prevent people from being forced into this work and support people wanting to exit the branch.

yeah, I totally agree with you. and @Az din I haven't known that idea of Voltaire yet, but it's great. And I think everyone has to be able to say anything, as long as it doesn't attack someone personally.

yes. I totally see your point when it comes to the context. I personally believe that freedom of speech can still be considered true, even though we have some limits, e.g. insulting someone personally etc. And I feel like sometimes, freedom of speech is a bit mistaken. Because freedom of speech allows you to say anything you want rather than say anything you want without getting any opposition. and at least in Germany, I feel like many people don't see the difference between these two things. Anyway, I got a bit off topic but, yes, I believe that one should be able to discuss controversial ideas. I mean being able to discuss controversial questions is one of the key parts of a democracy. but still, it is important and it is right that we put limits on it to prevent harm. I feel like this was a bit too long and a bit off topic but I could go on writing an entire essay about it...

true. my summer break has just started, but summer's really almost over. I get kinda autumn vibes right now...

I wanted to say: and especially men's metal health is often ignored

Yes, I agree with everything said here before. Everyone's mental health is important and often ignored.

ok the Steinmeier King thing is maybe a bad wording, but you know what I mean (he has almost only representative tasks)

yeah... I'm German, but don't have an opinion about him... just a quick correction of the question: Merz is actually the chancellor of Germany, not the president. That would be Steinmeier. But it's a bit like in the UK, so Steinmeier would be the king (mainly ceremonial tasks) and Merz the PM...