The Meaning of Life is to enjoy life regardless of contributions to society.

I will start by giving a short review and clarifictions of my three contentions and then finally refuting what the opponent has said and saying why there should still be a strong vote on the negation of this debate... (1) Helping Society - The reason I bring up helping out in society is because the Deabte clearly states "The point of life is to make yourself happy..." How is that possible? During chritsmas for example, many help out to give to those who need it. If we were to agree with the opponent, those who need help won't get it because as the opponent is trying to say, you should only help yourself. I ask the opponent, what if you were the one in need of food,clothes, etc? If people agreed to this debate we would not have people help out those in need! (2) The meaning of life varies, and as I've stated before, the majority would agree that helping out in society can make you happy without expecting something in return. Don't we do this at church? For those that go to church (any church) know that in some way you are giving to your community witout anything in return. Nothing but the happines of knowing that you are helping those in need, simply just doing something good in life. (3) Being happy. In the famous words from Legally Blond "Exercise gives you endorphins--endorphins make people happy and happy people just don't shoot their husbands... they just don't." I strongly agree. Not the "shooting thier husband part" because for this debate, that is quite irrelevant. When you're happy you're abviously not in a bad mood and if you find someone who is, be kind to the person. Take a fire for example, how are you going to put it out? Defenitly not with more fire. Same thing, happyness is contagious...spread it around and make other's happy too. To the opponent, hopefully that clears any misunderstanding. On to what the opponent has stated in this last round... About the example of a band playing...I stated this if for fund raising and although it may not be charity...it's still to help out. If this was for "socializing", why would people be going if they're not there to help out? "We would find it enjoyable to simply listen to the music and move to the beat" That's what's great about helping out in society. Not in every case, will you get something in return and when you do, that's great. This is an example simply to just get the point out there, that you can benefit also, but know that that will not always be the case. Help others, not because you will get something in return (not alwasy the case) ,but simply for your conscience to be at an emotional level where you will not ne feeling guilty. To answer your question about me volunteering at schools...it is not because I think I will get more respect from society. No I'm sorry I am not agreeing with you. The reason it makes me happy to help others is for many reasons. One of them being how it simply makes me happy to make others happy because (like I stated before) it puts me in a "non-guilty" mood, thus making me and others happy at the same time without me expecting something in return. Kind of like what the buddhist do...they try to achieve peace and emotional satisfaction. Once again this is not about getting something in return. You don't have to lose your individuality to help out others. I am not saying that we should all unite. As an individual you can make a big difference and help others in a way that can make you happy. There is no way everything and everyone wil be equal. All I'm saying is that helping others can also benefit you. I am not saying we shall all becaome one because even if we did...someone, something, sometime that equalness will be destroyed. In the book Anthem by Ayn Rand we see that although everyone was equal, it was destroyed by the end. This debate is about the point in life and saying that we should all be equal ius something that cannot be achieved. That's why I was talking about helping other, not about about being equal. Of coarse people prefer diffeerent things. I am not saying that everyone is and/or should be the same that is why I say that not always you are going to be happy if you oonly think about yourself. If you see a little girl crying...are you just going to walk by as if nothing is going on because you should only think about your happiness like the opponent believes? Of coarse-not. No one should be that heart-less. Finally, if you only help yourself you will not be able to help others (as the opponent stated in the closing comment). If this was true we would not have many organizations helping out others in need. We should see past our selfishness and trry to do something for your community. Every little thing counts. Thus, I still urge a trong vote on the negation of this debate .