frame

Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

DebateIsland.com is the largest online debate website globally where anyone can anonymously and easily debate online, casually or formally, while connecting with their friends and others. Users, regardless of debating skill level, can civilly debate just about anything online in a text-based online debate website that supports five easy-to-use and fun debating formats ranging from Casual, to Formalish, to Lincoln-Douglas Formal. In addition, people can improve their debating skills with the help of revolutionary artificial intelligence-powered technology on our debate website. DebateIsland is totally free and provides the best online debate experience of any debate website.





Abortion isn't okay no matter what

Debate Information

personally we all know that people are going to start talking about rape. it is a horrible horrible thing but it's not the baby that did it, just because someone does a wrong to you doesn't mean you have to do wrong. abortion is murder and the worse part is the baby can't do anything. just because u can see the child doesn't mean it's not living. a HEARTBEAT means LIFE. what's death? when the heartbeat stops. what's living when there is a heartbeat
AlofRIjesusisGod777KdCuber대왕광개토PlaffelvohfenScienceRulesLiamThePersonOakTownAjustanny5791Thesmartblondeand 4 others.
«134



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +




Post Argument Now Debate Details +

    Arguments


  • PlaffelvohfenPlaffelvohfen 2932 Pts   -  
    I think that abortion is ok no matter what... My position is as valid as yours... 
    DeeMayCaesarKdCuberZombieguy1987ScienceRulesTheLiberatorTreeManOakTownALuigi7255
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • DeeDee 4846 Pts   -  
    Denying a woman the right to bodily autonomy isn’t ok no matter what 
    AlofRIKdCuberPlaffelvohfenZombieguy1987ScienceRulesJohn_C_87TreeManOakTownAMrDebatePerson2dallased25
  • personally we all know that people are going to start talking about rape. it is a horrible horrible thing but it's not the baby that did it, just because someone does a wrong to you doesn't mean you have to do wrong. abortion is murder and the worse part is the baby can't do anything. just because u can see the child doesn't mean it's not living. a HEARTBEAT means LIFE. what's death? when the heartbeat stops. what's living when there is a heartbeat

    I don't  accept rape/incest needs to be discussed to justify abortion. I don't accept abortion is murder. I don't accept (by default) a baby/child exists in any womb. I don't accept a heartbeat is the only defining characteristic of life, and especially not personhood (where rights are attached).

    There's not a lot of room for us to find common ground here!

    PlaffelvohfenAlofRIKdCuberScienceRulesTreeManSwolliwOakTownA
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • MayCaesarMayCaesar 4800 Pts   -  
    Strong property rights include the right to own one's body, regardless of what is happening inside it, and a living organism growing there does not override this rule. Abortion and property rights are one and alike, and you cannot have one without the other.

    I find it curious that abortion is very popular among anti-capitalists, who do not believe in property rights and think that the state should decide who can own what, and very unpopular among capitalists, who are supposed to hold property rights dear. It is one of those political anomalies the source of which is hard to trace.
    KdCuberPlaffelvohfenZombieguy1987OakTownA
  • AlofRIAlofRI 1483 Pts   -  
    @MayCaesar ;

    I agree mostly with your first paragraph, the second is a bit hard to take. First of all I don't think abortion is "popular" with many people AT ALL. It is more of a necessary evil to most people. It is a CHOICE, and, MOST often a hard choice. It often considers the burden it will put on those that already have a "life", that need to eat, that need medicine, that are struggling. Maybe those that MUST keep working for those already here. It could be that they themselves just can't take another mouth to feed or that another will be "the straw that breaks the camel's back" as far as the existing family is concerned.

    That's the abortion part. Next is the programmed part about "anti-capitalists". There are a few, I know, that are "radical left wingers" "FEW" being the key word. I don't know of many on the left that could be called "anti-capitalists". The vast majority of Americans WANT successful capitalism, we just don't want capitalism to run the country because THAT would be against the Constitution and the Bill of Rights! This country is supposed to be OF, BY, and FOR the PEOPLE, not the corporations! Regulations are largely to protect the PEOPLE (and the country), from being cheated, from being dangerously exploited (bad drugs or dangerous pollution, etc.), as well as , as has been happening mostly since the 80's, corporations taking the government FROM the people. Anybody that thinks we can have a strong country without strong business has mental challenges! Anyone that thinks businesses should make all the rules are JUST as challenged. Russia has a government of businessmen (oligarchs) that do just about as they wish. They are only "regulated" by their "strong leader" … to coin our leader's(?) opinion. Anti-capitalists on the left?? Hogwash! You confuse the reality of anti-oligarchy with necessarily regulated capitalism which could be called anti-GREED.
    excon
  • jesusisGod777jesusisGod777 115 Pts   -  
    @seriously10

    Rape doesn't justify murder.

    I could care less about feelings.

    If you feel that feelings justify murder, than you would insinuate feelings are a basis for murder.

    Rapes a crime

    So murder.

    Murders not the answer.

    Rapists are horrible.

    So are people who abort.

    There is no moral justification is claiming rape is horrible so murder is a response to a crime that has caused a women to become pregnant.

    Pregnancy is a result of rape.

    Plenty of women have said they are glad they kept a child even though they were raped.

    So some retarted argument that rape justifys abortion is fallacious.

    So is aborting because a mother might not survive.

    Jesus decides who lives and who dies.

    If he decided you'd get pregnant it simply is a test of faith.

    Plenty of people have survived outside a doctor's opinion.

    They call it a practice for a reason.

    Jesus is Lord.

    However if Jesus dictates something else I'm wrong.

    I however am basing the statement on the best information availible.

    Many people have feelings. A lot of those feelings have cause a lot of people problems.

    I don't overvalue feelings and I don't disagree with the fact feelings are important.

    However, a lot of what happens has a bigger story than you know.

    Jesus is Lord.
    PlaffelvohfenSkepticalOneKdCuber대왕광개토Zombieguy1987ScienceRulesOakTownABlastcatdallased25
  • @jesusisGod777 How do you even know that Jesus dictates our lives(without referring to Bible)?
    KdCuberOakTownA
  • KdCuberKdCuber 74 Pts   -   edited September 2019
    @jesusisGod777

    You know... not everyone lives completely by the Bible. 

    Denying a woman the right to autonomously make decisions about HER body is a crime greater than murder, because you are essentially condemning her to life-long suffering.
    Statistically, it is a fact that children who were born in families where the mother didn't want a baby had much higher suicide rates, as well as mental health disorders. 

    You can't refer to the Bible in this one, society has changed too much.  Thinka bout it, the Bible was written approx 2000 years ago, 2000!
    You can't use a book written millenia ago, when society was TREMENDOUSLY different, in the present society that now allows for gender equality and right to property, and doesn't oppress women. You can't use the Bible for this debate because abortion was hardly a thing when the Bible was written. 
    대왕광개토AlofRIPlaffelvohfenOakTownA
  • KdCuberKdCuber 74 Pts   -   edited September 2019
    "Jesus decides who lives and who dies."

    Isn't that just a DISGUSTING statement. Someone believes himself to be so great that he now is omnipotent, can make people suffer beyond anything you have ever experienced, just for FUN? 

    You and your god are if you truly believe that making people suffer and die (sometimes horribly and VERY painfully) is OK. If your god truly were omnipotent and benevolent the great famine in Yemen wouldn't have happened. The Nanking massacre wouldn't have happened, nor the Holocaust. What about the Crusades? Do you truly think God dictated who died and who didn't? 

    Women and children were RAPED in these historical events, do you think God really commanded these actions? Because if he did, then he can go eat my . 
    PlaffelvohfenAlofRIcalebsicaOakTownATarikDzinic
  • KdCuberKdCuber 74 Pts   -   edited September 2019
    @jesusisGod777 
    "Rape doesn't justify murder."

    Then why is there the death sentence for rape in various countries? 

    "I could care less about feelings."
    But isn't Christianity all about looking into your feelings and finding god? Have you contradicted yourself?

    "If you feel that feelings justify murder, than you would insinuate feelings are a basis for murder."
    Firstly, it's "then", not "than". Than is used for comparatives, whereas then is a conjunction, but back to your claim. 
    Indeed feelings are a basis of murder, why else would someone kill someone else? Most murders (or better, all intentional murders) are driven by emotions, jealousy, anger etc... 

    "Rapes a crime. So murder."
    Probably the only true statement in your post. 

    "Murders not the answer."
    Yet Jesus had to die to save us humans didn't he? Oh..wait XD

    "Rapists are horrible."
    Oh look at that, another sensical argument. Maybe you're not as a drooling fucktard as I thought you to be. 

    "So are people who abort."
    I take that back. 

    "There is no moral justification is claiming rape is horrible so murder is a response to a crime that has caused a women to become pregnant."
    Then why does rape constitute for the death sentence in some countries. Imagine if you were abused, physically assaulted, and then impregnated against your will by a stranger? DO you know how hard it is for pregnant women or mothers to get jobs? You're literally ruining a woman's LIFE. 

    And how about the rape of minors. Imagine being the father of a little 8 year old girl, and one day you lose her at a park. She's been kidnapped, and is being tortured, assaulted and raped. I'd probably go insane just at the thought of this happening. The rapist has emotionally scarred the girl (who will probably commit suicide) and her parents. This is condemning them to life long suffering. The death sentence if anything is too light of a punishment, a rapist should be slowly killed and tortured. 

    "Pregnancy is a result of rape."
    Prengnacy is a result of unprotected coitus. 

    "Plenty of women have said they are glad they kept a child even though they were raped."
    That's because people like you in society are pressuring unwanting parents to feel glad, because otherwise they're seen as "monsters". Disgusting, it's like freedom of speech has disappeared...
    Furthermore, any evidence to back up your claim? I haven't found a single paper reaching your conclusions. 


    "So is aborting because a mother might not survive."
    If a mother isn't going to survive, and dies while still pregnant, the other parent may decide to have a premature pregnancy, or just abort. Those are the two ONLY options.  In the latter case, the fetus dies and that's it.
     If instead the parent resorts to an early pregnancy, well... there are just countless complications that come with it. Firstly, since the mother is oficially dead, the fetus has no source of oxygen, as blood circulation is cut off. The fetus is completely dependent on the mother’s circulation to provide air and food to the placenta. If the maturnal circulations stops, the fetus is completely without oxygen. The fetus can recover completely if it is deprived of oxygen for less than five minutes. It will survive with brain injury for up to ten minutes, After 10 minutes, all bets are off, the baby is either dead or in a vegetative state. In either case disastrous results. 

    So what is better? Killing the fetus then and there, or having a premature pregnancy, see the child die in front of you and/or remain in a vegetative state for the rest of its life? The humane choice is abortion. 

    "Jesus decides who lives and who dies.If he decided you'd get pregnant it simply is a test of faith."

    Isn't that just a DISGUSTING statement. Someone believes himself to be so great that he now is omnipotent, can make people suffer beyond anything you have ever experienced, just for FUN? 

    You and your god are if you truly believe that making people suffer and die (sometimes horribly and VERY painfully) is OK. If your god truly were omnipotent and benevolent the great famine in Yemen wouldn't have happened. The Nanking massacre wouldn't have happened, nor the Holocaust. What about the Crusades? Do you truly think God dictated who died and who didn't? 

    Women and children were RAPED in these historical events, do you think God really commanded these actions? Because if he did, then he can go eat my s h it .

    "I however am basing the statement on the best information availible."
    Where have you found these sources? Any references? 

    I have disproved all your arguments @jesusisGod777

    Abortion is oK. you're just too close-minded and back-minded to agree. 

    Plaffelvohfen대왕광개토ScienceRules
  • KdCuberKdCuber 74 Pts   -   edited September 2019
    @Plaffelvohfen

    It's not their fault...They were just brainwashed by their churches and took religion too literally...
    You can't let a book written millenia ago dictate every aspect of your life in the modern era. 
    Anyone who does so is retarded, and doesn't realise the danger of this approach to life. 

    However, they do constitute a severe danger to society..imagine if they brainwash even more kids ...
    As intellectuals it is our duty to educate radical religiousness...
    Plaffelvohfen대왕광개토
  • @jesusisGod777 You didn't even answer my question. I asked you a simple question because you often use Bible and other religious stuffs to back up your claim. In addition, prove that what you are saying is the truth without referring to Bible. I sincerely hope that you don't have any mental issue
  • personally we all know that people are going to start talking about rape. it is a horrible horrible thing but it's not the baby that did it, just because someone does a wrong to you doesn't mean you have to do wrong. abortion is murder and the worse part is the baby can't do anything. just because u can see the child doesn't mean it's not living. a HEARTBEAT means LIFE. what's death? when the heartbeat stops. what's living when there is a heartbeat

    No Abortion is not murder it is an official claim to a stop that takes place. This means when a woman is told and agrees with what was told to her that she has a choice in pregnancy abortion she makes a choice to confess to a crime she may not understand by its complex nature.

    Female specific amputation is not a pregnancy abortion. A woman does not ever autonomous control over pregnancy or her body in this relationship. As a united state all woman make the same choice to kill a baby with a pregnancy abortion. This takes place by not becoming pregnant and stopping the ovulation process.

    When woman ask to have a medical procedure performed a Doctor cannot ask, perform, or bill a woman for pregnancy abortion without exposure to self-incrimination to themselves and the patient. The basic lie is that a plan of Death is murder and that basic state is shared with all woman by not becoming or maintaining pregnancy.

    A woman can be told what to do with her body just as any male that isn’t the issue at all. The question is a woman is a international border with limited access to who may cross that border to gain entry into a Nation.

    Death of a baby isn’t the United State which all woman is not created equal on, prove one out of all woman who has not knowingly killed a baby by say no to sexual intercourse and the fertilization of a human egg. Can you?  it is the question of immigration of the person who is to enter a country legally through use of the woman at possibly risk to her life as a cost to the entry. A woman is not official killing for there is no independence of life, independence comes over a occurrence of maturity, and the stages of independence matter. As the death is only a constant point made by her choice to end the entry of a immigration at its starts to the United State of the World. All woman equally bear this constitutional union only by the natural ability to become pregnant.

    There is no constitutional representation of woman being made in united state at all in this matter of pregnancy. What is being represented is an accusation made directly against American united State Constitution and this is done with a lie as perjury when place in legislative law.

    Respectively I yield back time.

    대왕광개토
  • @KdCuber ;
    "Rape doesn't justify murder."

    The problem is rape is a form of assault, sexual assault has two principles. Principle one is types of sexual action, some kind of attack is principle two , with the state of force creates the union several forms of evidence can be found. Assault can progress to become a murder over a duration of its investigated life time. In a united state it is trying to justify a termination in basic principle of all woman's abilities to independent immigration into the world as United State. Though a woman may have been rape A.K.A. sexual assaulted it is not necessary to insure woman under United State Constitutional right to official stop immigration into a nation by legal precedent as it constitutional relates to woman by general welfare. 

    A female specific amputation does not effect life by self-incrimination it sets a immigration status to neutral in relationship to human health by the actions a woman may find necessary until reasonable information can be presented in well regulated grievance .

    A Rape is not need to address the female attack orginized on American United State Consitution at the asigned cost palced on woman.



  • AlofRIAlofRI 1483 Pts   -  
    I'll just say that about 70% of the U.S. and Canada disagree with the premise of this debate. Many of that percentage believe in the premise of the Christian God. They also believe in the Constitution as law of the land. They swear on the Bible to uphold that Constitution, they do NOT swear to uphold the Bible. Roe v. Wade is the law of the land and the vast majority stand by it. NO MINORITY should change it. Women had few rights in the Bible, they DO have rights in this country, and, as John Adams said: The government of the United States is not, in any sense, based on the Christian religion." (I hope I have that right …. close anyway ;) )  If we live by the Bible we will be no better than the Muslim countries that live by the Koran, and, eventually we will have another religious war with them. We must live by societal laws, not ancient religious laws as many Muslim countries do. It's unhealthy ………… and, a bit wacky. :smirk:
    대왕광개토PlaffelvohfenScienceRulesOakTownA
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -  
    @jesusisGod777

    Are you saying, no abortion even if the life of the mother is at risk?  That is dumb.  You can't argue based on religion, that is a fallacy.
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -   edited September 2019
    If people actually want to argue the point on abortion, they need to ask:  Is the fetus a human life, and is it's life more valuable than the convenience of the mother.  All other points are mute.

    To me, biology shows that the fetus is a human life, and personally I believe the essence of a human life is more valuable than that convenience.  Especially considering it is the woman who made the decision to allow a fetus grow inside her, not the fetus.  

    The most horrific moments in human history have come from us devaluing the life of humanity.  Are we currently making the same mistake?
    PlaffelvohfencalebsicaScienceRulesDebater123OakTownA
  • jesusisGod777jesusisGod777 115 Pts   -  
    @MichaelElpers

    More than 20 percent of patients who sought a second opinion at one of the nation’s premier medical institutions had been misdiagnosed by their primary care providers, according to new research published Tuesday.

    Second why do you KIDs keep on challenging reality.

    When two lived are wished which is more important 

    A child's life

    Or an adults life

    Stop directing comments at me.

    Jesus I'd Lord.
    Blastcatdallased25
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -  
    @jesusisGod777 ; You posted on a debate website, and you don't expect replies?

    While I agree with you that abortion is wrong a child and fetus are different.

    Also, while both are valuable, I would make the case that the adult who has currently made family, friendships, and additional relationships loss would cause more hardship than the death of a fetus.  Also I don't feel it is right to tell someone that they have to die for their baby.  This most definitely would cause a shortage in the people willing to become mothers, and it is just wrong to force someone to die for someone else. 

     Yes there are misdiagnosis, but we still have use the opinions of medical professionals regarding the life of the mother because they have the most valuable insight.


  • Abortion isn't okay no matter what


    Abortion is always okay no matter what. Satire!


    ScienceRules



  • am I doing responding to debates a year old?



  • Abortion destroys a developing person. It's always murder. @seriously10
    Murder is defined as the unjustified killing of a person. An abortion is either justified or there is no person. Abortion =/= murder by definition.
    PlaffelvohfenDebater123OakTownA
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • am I doing responding to debates a year old?
    Ugh...necropost got me too.
    Plaffelvohfen
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • mickygmickyg 349 Pts   -  
    THE BIBLE SUPPORTS ABORTION...MAYBE CHANGE YOUR BIBLE?
    OakTownA
  • debateladydebatelady 32 Pts   -  
    In my position, abortion is acceptable. Some couple does not have plenty money to group baby, they have to spend much money I think and education is getting expensive. If a couple recognizes the early stage It has to decide which way is best for. This is difficult decision for everyone. I think abortion is difficult decision for everyone but sometimes happen due to their situation. 
    Debater123PlaffelvohfenDuncanthedankleftist
  • A pregnancy abortion is legal all a woman or man needs to do is say not to specific sexual interactions. It is a female-specific amputation that may be found to be illegal. The problem with legislation written using the wording Pregnancy abortion is it had violated a right to privacy. Pregnancy abortion creates a united state build on the basic principle of murder, it was illegal in 1973 to legislate with it is still illegal to legislate with.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • Now granted, I don't believe abortion morally but I still want to help your point. First you would need to prove the value of a fetus, Second you need to prove its unethical to kill such fetus, Third you need to prove Human's relevance to the earth. I don't debate abortion because its hard to prove 1 and 2. 
  • @debatelady Your entire argument is flawed. "Some couple does not have plenty money to group baby, they have to spend much money I think and education is getting expensive." Adoption is ethical and you would have to prove the issues with putting the baby up for adoption.
  • anarchist100anarchist100 713 Pts   -  
    @seriously10

    NO OPINION

  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -  
    @Duncanthedankleftist. Often what we can determine what is objectively right and wrong through natural law theory.  Would you want your items stolen.  Would you want to be shot. Ect.  99.99% of humans would answer these questions the same way.  Similarly none of us would want to be aborted.

    For value.  In principle most agreed human life in itself has dignity.  If we'd start trying justify how much objective value each life has we run into sticky situations.  For example would the wealthy, strong, or intelligent be able to justify killing other humans because they are believed to have less objective value?  Who decides this value, myself the government, a majority?


    Plaffelvohfen
  • @Dee

    Body autonomy has everything to do with what makes this particular illegal admission wrong. Your admission to a crime should never be allowed to become a united state by legislation with all other women in the matter of female-specific amputation.
    A woman has a constitutional right to speak for herself and no free religion should be formed by law to interfere with that liberty.
    PlaffelvohfenDee
  • @MichaelElpers

     Who decides this value, myself the government, a majority?

    The burden was for women to choose to decide, they chose not to represent the American consitution as they felt it was a threat. The legislator eventually followed suit choosing to create a legal prejudice instead of placing the situation in a United Constitutional State. Realistically we have reached a waypoint in which the literal definition of the United States Constitution is to be tested as a better or worse position. Was it better to describe equality between women or men as a general principle of equality between all women as a united state before principle? The American United States Consitution set in writing clearly we are to find the more perfect union, so, when state disinvolve themselves from the American United States Consitution is it not fair to listen to what a little effort in principle can bring to the table? 
    Plaffelvohfen
  • @MichaelElpers

    For value.  In principle most agreed human life in itself has dignity.  If we'd start trying justify how much objective value each life has we run into sticky situations.

    It is because of human dignity that there is no right to use the body of another without consent.

    PlaffelvohfenOakTownA
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • @MichaelElpers

    For value.  In principle most agreed human life in itself has dignity.  If we'd start trying justify how much objective value each life has we run into sticky situations.

    It is because of human dignity that there is no right to use the body of another without consent.

    The end result is the idea of pregnancy and body autonomy is based on the inssistance that a women risk her life to perform a task of immigration on a child who is not emancipated. On the preservation level of consitution, if the woman first moves to legally emancipate her embryo before pregnancy takes place, it does mean the then emancipated child needs to seek her permission. I have no constitutional right to accuse all women of murder as it is an obvious lie, I am asked directly to take part in a lie when legislated into law. Dee, Plasffelvohfen are you pregnant? What reason do you have to unite all pregnant women in illegal admissions of murder? Have you been pregnant and given birth? Is there a reason for your prejudice against other women we don't know about maybe?
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -   edited February 2021
    @SkepticalOne. I'd disagree they didn't consent.  It's because of human dignity you can't justify killing an innocent human being.  Parents are responsible for their infants actions and well being.

    When you ride a Rollercoaster, can you get rid of the consent in the middle of a ride?  If you get a headache can you sue the park?

    It baffles me that people would allow abortion at 9 months but 2 seconds later when it's born the same action would be murder/neglect and would send you to jail.
    PlaffelvohfenOakTownA
  • @MichaelElpers

    I'd disagree they didn't consent. 

    Well, that's where you'd be wrong. Consent to sex is not consent to pregnancy. 

    When you ride a Rollercoaster, can you get rid of the consent in the middle of a ride?  If you get a headache can you sue the park?

    Weak analogy. I'm pretty sure neither of us think pregnancy and headaches are analogous. Pregnancy can be a goal while headaches most assuredly are not.

    It baffles me that people would allow abortion at 9 months but 2 seconds later when it's born the same action would be murder/neglect and would send you to jail.

    This is a hollow argument. Abortion at such a late stage doesn't generally happen on a whim. Anyone who has gone through 9 months of pregnancy has done so because they *want* a baby, and a late abortion is done with great reluctance for good reason such as the mother's life being endangered or fetal inviability. 

    PlaffelvohfenOakTownA
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne." I'm pretty sure neither of us think pregnancy and headaches are analogous. Pregnancy can be a goal while headaches most assuredly are not."

    The analogy still stands its just one consequence is considered worse than the other.  In the analogy which is related to abortion pregnancy and headaches are both seen as a bad thing. Your taking a risk to have fun, one is just a bigger risk.

    Whether it happens on a whim or not is irrelevant.  If I shoot an innocent person it doesn't matter how long I thought about it.  If the mothers life is at risk I have no problem with it.
  • @SkepticalOne
    Well, that's where you'd be wrong. Consent to sex is not consenting to pregnancy. 
    It is only when addressing complex civil principle does consent to sex not include pregnancy, even when donating sperm or embryo to medical science a person consents to pregnancy when participating in intercourse. What basic principle a woman does not agree upon by participation in sex is fulfilling the risk of immigration that pregnancy places her in. She can not agree in advance to conditions she does not autonomously know or control.
  • SkepticalOneSkepticalOne Gold Premium Member 1608 Pts   -   edited February 2021
    @MichaelElpers

    In the analogy which is related to abortion pregnancy and headaches are both seen as a bad thing.

    No. I've already provided one instance of abortion where the pregnancy (and birth) was desired. Besides that, pregnancy isn't generally seen as bad by those who have/ had abortions - many have other children or go on to have children later. 

    Headaches are generally avoided by all...all the time. Its a bad analogy.

    If I shoot an innocent person it doesn't matter how long I thought about it.  If the mothers life is at risk I have no problem with it.

    Just to be clear, you are essentially arguing some people have a right to use the body of another so long as the person being used is not endangered. That's alarming. 

    As I started with, there is no right to use the body of another without consent. Period. Change that and you fundamentally harm the notion of 'rights'.

    Plaffelvohfen
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -   edited February 2021
    @SkepticalOne. That doesn't matter because regarding abortion which is what we're talking about pregnancy is unwanted.

    No what I'm arguing is that if you are the reason that persons life is endangered, you should have they should be able to use your body if it doesn't harm you.  For example if you stabbed someone, they should be able to use your blood to save their life.

    Your conveniently ignoring the fact that the mother is responsible for creating the fetus.

    I still disagree that they didn't consent. 
    PlaffelvohfenOakTownA
  • @MichaelElpers

    That doesn't matter because regarding abortion which is what we're talking about pregnancy is unwanted.

    You should go back and re-read my words because this point is being lost on you. Abortion doesn't mean pregnancy is unwanted.

    No what I'm arguing is that if you are the reason that persons life is endangered, you should have they should be able to use your body if it doesn't harm you.  For example if you stabbed someone, they should be able to use your blood to save their life.

    Yea, that's what I thought you were saying. Again, this is alarming.

    I still disagree that they didn't consent. 

    I don't think you understand consent is conditional and not agreement for every possible outcome of an action. I don't think I can help you on that.

    PlaffelvohfenOakTownA
    A supreme being is just like a normal being...but with sour cream and black olives.
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -  
    @SkepticalOne How many people abort the babies they want?  Your point was and irrelevant to the argument. Whether the consequence is good or bad is irrelevant anyways.

    Your advocating for a society where you are able to perform actions and only consent to certain consequences.  Thats not the way life works.  You consent to actions knowing possible consequences.  Knowing these consequences you decide whether or not to perform the action.

    For example, I may go to college in order to get a job. Just because I don't get one doesn't mean I don't have to pay for it.
    TheLiberatorOakTownA
  • bjinthirtybjinthirty 119 Pts   -  
    When a topic for discussion differs with no prevailing party, the situation is turned over to a hierarchy to mediate. No good or bad answer is consistent therefore falls in the hands of what is destined. Aborted or not, the blame falls on the female and male for failing communication, responsibility, planning, and/or intentions. The state could only do so much.
  • @SkepticalOne
    Just to be clear, you are essentially arguing some people have a right to use the body of another so long as the person being used is not endangered. That's alarming. 
    Essentially? Nothing about this topic sticks to a natural process. All the Supreme Court said is women have a constitutional right to remain silent and the right is violated by the name given to a medical procedure.
  • @SkepticalOne

    I don't think you understand consent is conditional and not agreement for every possible outcome of an action. I don't think I can help you on that.

    The outcome is very limited by any agreement of this kind, no woman seeks the consent of the embryo after her body illegally detains it, she the woman is the legal guardian and this is the reason even the medical field seeks written consent when taking embryo into their custody without a crime taking place.
  • @SkepticalOne
    Cut the . Establish pregnancy abortion is not an admission to murder, do not explain how a person may be cleared if the admission is a lie.
    Second, explain what act of nature and not opinion places women in a united state by creating a category pregnancy abortion?
  • The right for women to have the right to have an abortion is necessary. If it goes against your beliefs or values for whatever reason then you don't have to get an abortion, but that doesn't allow you to govern over the people who do. What I truly hate is seeing people in power (congressmen, etc.) who don't know much on the subject of abortion, make the one decision that it is bad even if it harms no one, and take away women's right to choose. Then millions suffer as the result and the people in power forget about it the next day.

    This is not to mention that its a direct violation of human rights to put a bill in place that takes away the option for women.
    SkepticalOneOakTownA
  • anarchist100anarchist100 713 Pts   -  
    @TheLiberator
    Is the right to exist a human right?
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 988 Pts   -  
    @TheLiberator. "make the one decision that it is bad even if it harms no one".  Abortion does harm someone, in fact it kills them.
  • @TheLiberator
    The right for women to have the right to have an abortion is necessary.

    No, it's not necessary it's an admission to a crime. Pregnancy abortion is me describing a type of murder.
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
© 2021 DebateIsland.com, all rights reserved. DebateIsland.com | The Best Online Debate Experience! Debate topics you care about in a friendly and fun way. Come try us out now. We are totally free!

Contact us

customerservice@debateisland.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch