Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.
Reward Points: | 10 |
Efficiency:
Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive). Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high. | 100% |
Arguments: | 10 |
Debates: | 0 |
I totally agree mitchell! They definitely need to keep it safe from terrorists just not effecting everyones privacy though
But they should only be able to monitor some of the internet, not your personal stuff that you're doing though
I agree, i think the government should be able to look at the bad things but not everything that we say, or control absolutely everything that we can do or say on different sites.
We all have freedom of speech, and if the government is tracking our every move of the internet, that is taking away our right completely. If they don't want us to go on a site then they should take that site off the internet.
I agree, i think that they need to keep away hackers but find a way to not get into everyones business
I think that the government should be involved with the internet because if they were'nt, then it would just be easier for people to do illegal things. But i also don't think they should see everything that people do because thats invading our privacy. If they don't want people to do as many bad things, then they should take some sites off the internet or make them illegal.
I agree with ella because if they can control everything that we do or see on the internet, that would be invading our personal privacy.
The federalists and the anti-federalists are very opposite with their opinions for the ratification of the constitution. The anti-federalists wanted the bill of rights ratified right away with the constitution. The federalists agreed to propose a bill of rights but after the constitution was ratified. The federalists also believed that the bill of rights having the rights of citizens was unnecessary because the constitution already limited the government's powers. I agree with the anti-federalists because i think that the they needed that bill of rights ratified rights away to build more laws and rules to follow and also to help support a strong state to protect people's liberties.
I agree with gabe, if the people had a king, then that would just be someone who's ordering them around and telling them what to do. We need a leader who helps us make decisions and that we are able to follow and trust.
Federalists and Anti-Federalists are pretty much the exact opposite. Federalists supported a strong, federal, or national government, and Anti-Federalists believed that each state should have a sovereign, independent government. Federalists also supported a strong national government to protect the states, but anti- federalists feared that a strong national government might not respect citizens' rights or people's liberties.
I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know! |