Should abortion be abolished? - The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com - Debate Anything The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com
frame

Howdy, Stranger!

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

The Best Online Debate Website | DebateIsland.com. The only online debate website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the leading online debate website. Debate popular topics, debate news, or debate anything! Debate online for free! DebateIsland is utilizing Artifical Intelligence to transform online debating.


The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free!

Should abortion be abolished?
in Politics

By YeshuaRedeemedYeshuaRedeemed 513 Pts edited September 18
I say no. There are too many what ifs to abolish abortion. I am personally opposed, but supportive of last resort choice. No one actually likes abortion. As the only disabled child (now 38) of a mother without adequate support for her and myself, I believe tough choices sometices have to be made, even if the fetus is a baby. Forced organ donation is not a right. I promise not to be abusive, but if anyone wants to debate me, post here. MartinGocic inspired me to make this debate, even if I disagree with him on this.
AlofRIMartinGocic대왕광개토NavieusMattGouldambeeRickeyD
«1345



Debra AI Prediction

Predicted To Win
Predicted To Win
Tie

Details +



Arguments

  • DeeDee 1072 Pts
    A woman’s body a woman’s choice. Denial of access to bodily autonomy in the case of abortion is the denial of a basic right so abortion should be legal
    SkepticalOnePlaffelvohfenAlofRIMartinGocicThePresident2040mamo
  • Sadly, you are addressing the United states of Constitution like is was dependent on democracy to form a more perfect union of united states. It has, it can be proven by the introduction of constitutional principle like female specific amputation the act of female pregnancy abortion in fact can be abolishment and even replaced as a unconstitutional issues without sacrifice to truth, justice, and the united state to create all woman as equal.

    The illegal part of abortion is the creation of self-incrimination as the perfect union of united states. Abolishing the crime and loosing the self-incrimination of crime does not have any influence on the medical necessities of treatment.

    PlaffelvohfenAlofRI
  • Forced organ donation is not a right, but should be if another individual is reason for you needing an organ.  For example, if someone stabbed you, and caused you need a kidney, they should be forced to give you one of theirs if that does not kill them.

    Because the mother is the reason the fetus exists in her womb, she carries the responsibility for carrying it.
    PlaffelvohfenAlofRIYeshuaRedeemed
  • @Dee

    Does a man get any input their children?   Like Dave Chappelle says in his new special, if a women has a right to kill the bay, I should at least have the right to leave it.

    The man doesn't get to decide whether his child is born or not.  If it is he must pay child support.  In divorce cases or separation, it is nearly impossible for the man to gain a higher level of custody than the female. Just curious if you think that is unfair at all?
    Navieusmamo
  • AlofRIAlofRI 353 Pts
    edited September 16
    @John_C_87 ;
    The U.S. Constitution? The SCOTUS says what is Constitutional or not. The SCOTUS has spoken on this, it IS a woman's right. Some want to take away that right. Well over 60% of Americans say LEAVE THAT ALONE. 
    To often, especially the years since 2010, a minority tries to run this country. THAT is against the Constitution! 

    Also, religious influence in the government is against the Constitution, as John Adams said, "The American government is, in no sense, based on the Christian religion." (Or any other)!
  • Forced organ donation is not a right, but should be if another individual is reason for you needing an organ.  For example, if someone stabbed you, and caused you need a kidney, they should be forced to give you one of theirs if that does not kill them.

    Because the mother is the reason the fetus exists in her womb, she carries the responsibility for carrying it.
    No the egg is the reasons the fetus is in the womb. She did not let it die and that has little if anything to do with the many reasons the journey over an international border can be refused by all woman as united state.

    Okay, once again slowly. All woman bring a person across an international border as united state when a child becomes independent. Not all woman who become pregnant are capable to provide a means for a person to cross an international border.

    No Rape.
    No Self-incrimination to rape or murder.
    No incest.
    No black market organ donations.

    I am here to bury female pregnancy abortion, not woman. We have buried enough of the latter and what comes before as united state is generally literally discarded by all woman.
  • DeeDee 1072 Pts


    Does a man get any input their children? 

    Well most times their is a very good reason for denying a man a say in the matter , if not I would like to hear the other side out 

      Like Dave Chappelle says in his new special, if a women has a right to kill the bay, I should at least have the right to leave it.

    I don’t know who that guy is . What do you mean leave it? As in abandon it if that’s the case that’s another reason a woman often aborts 

    The man doesn't get to decide whether his child is born or not.  If it is he must pay child support.  In divorce cases or separation, it is nearly impossible for the man to gain a higher level of custody than the female. Just curious if you think that is unfair at all?


    In cases of abortion the woman does so for very good reasons and it’s usually a last resort , a lot of anti abortion people seem to think it’s done merely as a convenience.


    I can certainly see cases of unfairness at times but isn’t that always the way with anything like this? Also they are the exceptions 

    Plaffelvohfen
  • @Dee

    The numbers say they do it out of convenience.  Only life or serious bodily harm would be a reason other than convenience.

    Yes, If a woman can kill it without a man's input, why can't the man decide not to pay child support without the woman's input.  (I'm not saying they should do this).  Apparently he has no decision whether the baby is born or not so why would they be forced to take care of it?
  • DeeDee 1072 Pts
    edited September 16
    @MichaelElpers


    The numbers say they do it out of convenience.  Only life or serious bodily harm would be a reason other than convenience.

    That’s simply not true. From a survey carried out in your own country ......So everything else to you is “convenience? 


    RESULTS: The reasons most frequently cited were that having a child would interfere with a woman’s education, work or ability to care for dependents (74%); that she could not afford a baby now (73%); and that she did not want to be a single mother or was having relationship problems (48%). Nearly four in 10 women said they had completed their childbearing, and almost one-third were not ready to have a child. Fewer than 1% said their parents’ or partners’ desire for them to have an abortion was the most important reason. Younger women often reported that they were unprepared for the transition to motherhood, while older women regularly cited their responsibility to dependents.

    CONCLUSIONS: The decision to have an abortion is typically motivated by multiple, diverse and interrelated reasons. The themes of responsibility to others and resource limitations, such as financial constraints and lack of partner sup- port, recurred throughout the study.




    Yes, If a woman can kill it without a man's input, why can't the man decide not to pay child support without the woman's input.  (I'm not saying they should do this).  Apparently he has no decision whether the baby is born or not so why would they be forced to take care of it?



    But some men do refuse to pay child support leading some women to abort out of need of financial support.


    I don’t really care whether men support a woman or not my whole point deals with a woman’s right to bodily autonomy something you wish to deny them 

  • @Dee

    Yes, convenience is the ability of effort to proceed with less effort of difficulty.  Affecting education, work, not being able to afford it.  Those are all things in which a baby in the mother's eyes would make their lives harder.  They are aborting it in order to make their lives easier or more convenient.

    Funny, that bodily autonomy wasn't listed a reason for abortion. 
  • DeeDee 1072 Pts
    edited September 16

    @MichaelElpers
    Yes, convenience is the ability of effort to proceed with less effort of difficulty.  Affecting education, work, not being able to afford it.  Those are all things in which a baby in the mother's eyes would make their lives harder.  They are aborting it in order to make their lives easier or more convenient.
    Your skewed world view does not reflect the reality of the situation and to accuse women of aborting out of convenience demonstrates extreme ignorance. 

    They are not aborting out of “connivence” they are aborting out of desperation in most cases.  


    Funny, that bodily autonomy wasn't listed a reason for abortion. 
     
    Because bodily autonomy is what women exercise when they abort  and is never used as a reason expect by people like you who see it as a convenience also

    Funny that convenience wasn’t listed as a reason for abortion   

    Plaffelvohfen
  • @Dee

    Why are you using bodily autonomy then as the reason women should be able to abort.  I'm told that women aren't intent on killing the fetus, but it is an expression of bodily autonomy.  Except based on the reasons it's not.  They kill them for convenience.
    The point is when it comes to abortion women don't actually care about the bodily autonomy portion otherwise they would list body limitations/hardships as a reason for having the abortion.

    People have a skewed view on what desperation is.  Having to delay school or lowering the amount of wealth you may have is not desperation.  Having a child is scary, but we need to start teaching people ways in which they can deal with their situation, not let fear lead to desperation big enough to kill a fetus.
  • DeeDee 1072 Pts
    edited September 16
    @MichaelElpers

    Why are you using bodily autonomy then as the reason women should be able to abort


    I’m not , nor have I used it as a reason , I told you several times the reason women abort are varied they excecise bodily autonomy when they do so .


    The rest of what you say is merely your opinion on the matter and one I disagree with 

    Plaffelvohfen
  • @MichaelElpers

    One should not be forced to give birth if she doesn't want to... To discard having to be responsible for a child for the rest of his life as a mere "inconvenience" is loathsome...
    Dee
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 113 Pts
    edited September 16
    @Dee

    Your last resort claim is crap.  It is the last resort to keep them from having a baby and hindering the lifestyle that they want...there are not 1 million mothers every year in America in that much desperation.  Delaying an opportunity for education is not desperation. 

    You use exercising bodily autonomy as the reason women are ALLOWED to abort, even though they could care less about their bodily autonomy when it comes to abortion.  Using it as the means to get what they really want.
    "Stay away from my body." When what they really want is...stay away from my ability to kill my own offspring in order to keep the lifestyle I deem fit for myself. 
  • To discard having to be responsible for a child for the rest of his life as a mere "inconvenience" is loathsome...

    That's what it is given the reasons stated by women.  It is a large inconvenience sure, but one they created.  Discarding a human life to continue a lifestyle you believe you deserve could be deemed by some as loathsome.

    Also...adoption
    PlaffelvohfenDee
  • @MichaelElpers

    I don't consider an unborn fetus to be a human life... It's human in the sense it has human DNA, like a hair or a toe nail but that's it...
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    The cells for an unborn fetus develop into a human being.  The cells begin performing different functions all with the design to develop and create human life.  It's unique DNA.  I find it hard not to place value on a developmental stage of human life that everyone must go through to be alive today.


  • @MichaelElpers

    Whether you find it hard or not, it's only an opinion...I don't find it hard at all...
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    Well logically it's hard not to.  Without the development, no one would exist.
  • @Dee ;
    Lol,you have the basic right to freedom,choices in life,but if you think that murder is acceptable because you were selfish enough not to care or use protection,then your rights may be stripped from you since you are a threat to society. 
    And especially a threat to other women since no sane one would argue this.
    But then again,women who are leaning more right-wing and who are more conservative are even generally better-looking (proven fact), hence they do not feel inferior and have no need to cry and complain about not being able to commit murder. 
    The truth may hurt but facts dont care for opinions :)

    Plaffelvohfen대왕광개토
  • @YeshuaBought
    You sound somewhat suicidal in this post...of course abortion should never be performed or allowed. Men who support or allow things like this (or who support some frustrated feminists crying about everything since they look abhoring or are extremely dull), are the kind of men who would freeze in fear if they were threatened by someone and would let their loved ones perish since they are cowards. The truth needs to be said,even if it hurts. The future generations will thank us. Perverted and distorted ways of thinking and living need to die off.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • AlofRI said:
    @John_C_87 ;
    The U.S. Constitution? The SCOTUS says what is Constitutional or not. The SCOTUS has spoken on this, it IS a woman's right. Some want to take away that right. Well over 60% of Americans say LEAVE THAT ALONE. 
    To often, especially the years since 2010, a minority tries to run this country. THAT is against the Constitution! 

    Also, religious influence in the government is against the Constitution, as John Adams said, "The American government is, in no sense, based on the Christian religion." (Or any other)!

    You really do not have to read my rebuttal. You can just skip to the end if you like and answer yes or no?

    The U.S. Constitution? The SCOTUS says what is Constitutional or not.

    Ah? Okay. Or maybe they just make rulings on Court cases that make it to the Supreme Court. There hasn’t been a criminal charge of perjury filed as grievance in a criminal court of law against the claim made as female pregnancy abortion.

    Some want to take away that right. Well over 60% of Americans say LEAVE THAT ALONE. 

    Yeah and? 60% of Americans are a limited united State based on leave that crime alone.

    a minority tries to run this country. THAT is against the Constitution! 

    Realistically the understand is people not being equipped to legally establish beyond reasonable doubt a crime of perjury, this is not a religious settlement. A minority that holds legal grievance to objection as. a American united state can exorcise a right that is inalienable when creating all woman as equal. At this point and time historically, the American Supreme Court has not issued any objections on refuse to sanction discrimination made with the use of self-incrimination on all woman for any reason.

    I have no idea what you are taking about the Supreme Court has voiced one objection to female specific amputations in any way shape or form. In all the years it has been used against the self-incrimination. Unlike pregnancy abortion I have not heard one legal objection. Religious or not It has been over 14 years.

    Do you have some legal reason why we would need to self-incriminate all woman with a crime as united state ?  


  • @MichaelElpers
    Well logically it's hard not to.
    Logical deductions rely on premises... Different premises, different deductions... 
    Without the development, no one would exist.
    ???? If some individual doesn't value X it should follow that no one else would??  

    It seems obvious enough (we're here right?) that some people do value this "development"... How did you conclude that "no one would exist"?

    This development exist whether we value it or not, we have no say in the matter... What we do with it though, will be subjectively decided on an individual basis. 
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • Important to understand AlofRI a united state declaration to abolish something from Constitution is not the same as any attempt to establish a supreme authority as might be seen as a tyrannical God. The crime of female pregnancy abortion is not a question of murder the legal grievance is over the way it places all woman into a group of murders.

    Those who murder babies by not fertilizing a human egg and those women who murder babies by fertilizing a human egg.

    So is the orderly collection of woman who stop immigration or allow immigration across international border a perfect union to preserve a presumption of innocence as a united state?

  • DeeDee 1072 Pts
    @MichaelElpers


    Your last resort claim is crap.  It is the last resort to keep them from having a baby and hindering the lifestyle that they want...there are not 1 million mothers every year in America in that much desperation.  Delaying an opportunity for education is not desperation.  

    My last resort? I haven’t got a “last resort “ despite you saying so.  Right , so first you claimed it was for “convenience” now it’s a “lifestyle” choice “ what next?

    Right not that many people are in desperation in the U S , how come 41 million Americans suffer from food poverty then?
     



    You use exercising bodily autonomy as the reason women are ALLOWED to abort,

    Something you wish to outlaw 

    even though they could care less about their bodily autonomy when it comes to abortion.

    But they could as that’s what they are excercising 


      Using it as the means to get what they really want.

    Well isn’t that obvious really if they don’t want a baby they are excercising their  right to bodily autonomy just like when a man wants a baby he’s getting what he wants ....mostly 

    "Stay away from my body." When what they really want is...stay away from my ability to kill my own offspring in order to keep the lifestyle I deem fit for myself. 
    How is a fetus “offspring”? Shame on women wanting a decent life , it’s scandalous bullies like you cannot force them into giving birth 




    .
    Plaffelvohfen
  • @Dee

    A lifestyle choice and convenience is the same thing.

    Offspring- the organism(s) resulting from sexual reproduction.  That's how a fetus is offspring.

    My point is women could care less about bodily autonomy they only use it as means to kill their offspring.  What a man wants doesn't matter, they don't get hardly any decisions regarding children.

    Yes, shame on women who resort to ending an innocent life they created in order to live the lifestyle they want.  You can live a decent life with children, or give them up for adoption...the waiting lines are nearly endless.


    Plaffelvohfen
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    I didn't conclude because X doesn't value no one values it.  I concluded that without this development no one would exist, so it is valuable.
  • DeeDee 1072 Pts
    edited September 17
    @MichaelElpers


    ****A lifestyle choice and convenience is the same thing.

    So you keep saying but I never claimed abortion was either that’s on you 

    ****Offspring- the organism(s) resulting from sexual reproduction. 

    Thats called a child 

    ****That's how a fetus is offspring. 

    So a fetus is a child .....Wow! 

    ****My point is women could care less about bodily autonomy they only use it as means to kill their offspring. 

    Another sweeping generalization stated with nothing to back it up 

     ****What a man wants doesn't matter, they don't get hardly any decisions regarding children.

    Really ? Is America really that backward 

    ****Yes, shame on women who resort to ending an innocent life they created in order to live the lifestyle they want.

    You’re totally confused now your saying women create only to destroy you’re making no sense 

      ****You can live a decent life with children, or give them up for adoption...the waiting lines are nearly endless.

    You can  live a terrible with children why bring a child into the world to add to your suffering if your life is such?

  • @MichaelElpers

    " I concluded that without this development no one would exist, so it is valuable."

    You value it, in itself it doesn't have any value, it is still subjective... I don't value existence "in itself", it just is, whether I like it or not is irrelevant... It does have an instrumental value but is always derivative on the value of something else, and it is always conditional (it needs context).

    Many people value species and ecosystems intrinsically (e.g., for their complexity, diversity, spiritual significance, wildness, beauty, or wondrousness). As a result, species and ecosystems have subjective intrinsic value.
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • DeeDee 1072 Pts
    @MartinGocic

    Lol,you have the basic right to freedom,choices in life,but if you think that murder is acceptable because you were selfish enough not to care or use protection,then your rights may be stripped from you since you are a threat to society. 
    Lol , Yes you do but I notice  you have a big but in there. It’s murder now in the U S to abort is it? I notice also you admit stripping away rights is fine once your type are doing it 




    And especially a threat to other women since no sane one would argue this.
    No sane person would force women to give birth against their wishes 


    But then again,women who are leaning more right-wing and who are more conservative are even generally better-looking (proven fact), hence they do not feel inferior and have no need to cry and complain about not being able to commit murder. 
    The truth may hurt but facts dont care for opinions 

    Another ridiculous sweeping generalisation from you , how do you come about these opinions or are they from the local KKK monthly newsletter?
    .
    Truth is an alien concept to you and I’m not really interested in the opinion of your local KKK branch 
    Plaffelvohfen
  • @Dee ;

    *             "So you keep saying but I never claimed abortion was either that’s on you"

    You may not have claimed abortion is a lifestyle choice or convenience, but it is supported by the reasons you cited.

    *             "So a fetus is a child .....Wow!"

    You don't think a fetus is an organism...I'm just using the definition of offspring.  I never said offspring=child.

    *           "Another sweeping generalization stated with nothing to back it up"

    Nope, Using bodily autonomy only as a means is not a sweeping generalization, otherwise it would be cited as a reason for obtaining one.

    *           "Really ? Is America really that backward"

    What decisions do men get that ever trump a women's when regarding children?

    *            You’re totally confused now your saying women create only to destroy you’re making no sense.

    I never said the create only to destroy.  They accidentally create and then destroy in order to keep a lifestyle they want.

    *            You can  live a terrible with children why bring a child into the world to add to your suffering if your life is such?

                  Because you can't kill something just to make your life better.  You also can't determine for the child that their suffering would be so great they'd rather be dead.  If the suffering is that bad why hasn't the mother committed suicide? (Clarity: Don't commit suicide)



  • @Plaffelvohfen

    "I don't value existence "in itself"."  Then why do you also support laws against murder, slavery, ect.  If the value of a person is subjective, why can't we subjectivity determine the value of people who are already born.  

    As a society we subjectively have determined that individuals don't get to act based on the value they individually see in someone else.  Everyone is created equal.
  • @MichaelElpers

    I support laws against murder, slavery, etc, in the context of living in society... Any society (whether human or not) cannot sustain itself if its members kill each other arbitrarily...
    If the value of a person is subjective, why can't we subjectivity determine the value of people who are already born. 
    What makes you think we can't?? We do it all the time... I value my siblings more than any unknown individual in China for example, it's a subjective opinion... 
    As a society we subjectively have determined that individuals don't get to act based on the value they individually see in someone else. 
    Absolutely, the context here is, as I mentioned above, is living in society...
     Everyone is created equal.
    That is demonstrably false... Some are taller, some are stronger, some are blind, etc... We decided that we should be "treated" as equal in a societal context but we're far from being created equal... 

    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    Society can still sustain itself without these laws.  The strong will just out do the weak.  Just because there's no murder law doesn't mean we will just kill each other arbitrarily into extinction.

    Everyone is created equal under the law.  We can value people closest to us more, but law sets a limit on how little we can value someone.  We can't harm another for personal gain.
  • @MichaelElpers

    A society without those laws would be less stable and thriving than another who doesn't have those... That is objectively true... So, in the context of societal performance, it's better to have those laws than not have them... 

    Now, as I said, everyone is "treated" equal under the law, the law doesn't create us... We absolutely can harm another for personal gain, it happens all the time, there may be consequences if you get caught, but someone may just not care about those consequences, a quick look around should show that many people do not care about those consequences... Again it's a subjective view... 

    And now, it seems we moved away from the moral perspective to a legal one?
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    "There may be consequences if you get caught"...yeah that's a law.  Duh people can still choose to do things that are illegal.

    In societal performance it may be better as a whole, but not for certain individuals.  
  • @MichaelElpers
    In societal performance it may be better as a whole, but not for certain individuals.
    Obviously... But that's because you move from a societal context to an individual context...  I don't know where you're going with this though...


    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • MichaelElpers said: @Plaffelvohfen
     "There may be consequences if you get caught"...yeah that's a law.  Duh people can still choose to do things that are illegal. In societal performance it may be better as a whole, but not for certain individuals.  

     @Plaffelvohfen ;
    @MichaelElpers

    There is always consequence plus justification which may negate a conviction of law broken. So what justifies a breaking of the law perjury? To place all woman in a united state by admission to murder only after woman leave the united state set by nature of murdering a babies. Not one but multiple babies.

    "There may be consequences if you get caught"...yeah that's a law.  Duh people can still choose to do things that are illegal.
    No people do things which may be found in court to be illegal unless an admission is officially made before court..

    So what does the Murdering Virgin woman official stop that the Murdering nonvirgin woman officially stop as well?

    Is there reason or purpose to hold this argument outside the United States of law?


    Plaffelvohfen
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    I'm saying I believe that as a society we should make the subjective decision to value the fetus enough to end abortion because it produces a more moral society.
  • @MichaelElpers

    That is just your personal opinion... In itself it's valid, don't have an abortion if you don't want one and feel like you are more "moral", good for you...
    Saying that abolishing abortion produces a "more moral" society is very, very subjective... Too subjective to go into law...
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    That argument doesn't work for me because you are affecting someone else other than yourself. It's not like getting a tattoo.  The same reason we don't say if you don't want slaves don't have any.  We are protecting the innocent.
  • @MichaelElpers

    I don't agree with you that the fetus is "someone"... That is still your personal opinion, you cannot force your personal beliefs on anyone...
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    It is scientifically a human life.  Look a pregnancy chart and tell me when it becomes a person.  You can say birth, but that makes absolutely 0 logical sense.  I don't agree that "personhood" should be subjectively defined on an individual basis.
    YeshuaRedeemed
  • @MichaelElpers

    You're fallaciously equivocating... Sure it has human DNA, like a toe nail but it is not a person... Birth is the only objective moment when a fetus becomes a person with all corresponding rights and duties, not before...  
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • @Plaffelvohfen

    That argument doesn't work for me because you are affecting someone else other than yourself. It's not like getting a tattoo.  The same reason we don't say if you don't want slaves don't have any.  We are protecting the innocent.

    Is there reason or purpose to woman holding this argument outside the United States of constitutional law?

    Understanding that I bring a grievance that is not pleasant news to either Plaffelvohen or yourself, all woman who ovulate kill babies by female pregnancy abortion.  To create a union of understanding abolishing a process like female pregnancy abortion, with the use of united principle American United State Constitution, neither must be detrimental to woman’s United State Constitutional right or in any way detrimental to medical conditions pertained to woman health as a United state.

    The action of a constitutional objection is targeted to the abolishment of legal use of female pregnancy abortion. The test is to preserve the state as grouping of all woman MichaelElpers. All woman have a type of female pregnancy abortions killing babies as the result of the official stop. All female pregnancy abortion are equal and insist that only those who use the phrase admit to the official killing of babies.


    Plaffelvohfen
  • MichaelElpersMichaelElpers 113 Pts
    edited September 17
    @Plaffelvohfen

    Which again is ridiculous as babies inside the womb can be more developed those already born.  You state that its not a person and that birth grants them rights only as a statement, you have no argument to back that up.

    You always compare the fetus to a toenail, but anyone can scientifically look at the functional difference between those of a developing fetus and a toenail can realize that you are purposefully being simple and playing dumb to support your argument.
  • @MichaelElpers

    You acknowledged that science cannot define a precise moment... Any moment other than birth would be subjective, birth is the only objective moment when personhood can be granted as it has been for millennium... 

    There are a great many facts that pro-lifers feel comfortable ignoring when it comes to the abortion debate. They can pretend fetuses are indistinguishable from babies, despite the fact that medical evidence tells us fetuses cannot live unsupported, even with a respirator before 21 weeks. They can pretend they feel pain, even though scientific consensus tells us that until at least 24 weeks, a fetus cannot feel anything like pain because they do not yet have the brain connections to do so.

    Considering that less than 1% of all abortions take place after the 24th week, it nonsensical to banish all abortions based on those numbers... 
    " Adversus absurdum, contumaciter ac ridens! "
  • Neither of you have provided link or reason to legally establish that female pregnancy abortion is not a united state with all woman share by killing babies to continue the ovulation process. Do you, or do you not know that by failing to nurture the baby as egg it will die? No man to blame, no doctor of science, here all woman as united state share the same act of killing in the same way. Yes or no? The same can be proven for all men as united state ion connection to sperm. How killing is allowed does become a legal precedent when addressed as the basic principle.

    Statistically that is 100% of all female pregnancy abortions take place with all woman who ovulate including those of higher intellect and fanatical status.
    Plaffelvohfen
  • TKDBTKDB 340 Pts
    https://www.foxnews.com/us/remains-of-more-than-2200-fetuses-found-at-home-of-deceased-abortion-doctor-reports

    "Abortion doctor's family finds remains of more than 2,200 fetuses at his home after his death: reports"


    "According to FOX 59, Klopfer’s medical license was suspended in 2015 after accusations that he failed to report an abortion performed on a 13-year-old girl.

    The Will County Sheriff’s Office has launched an investigation into the matter, WSBT-TV of South Bend reported. The county coroner's office took possession of the remains, the sheriff's office said in a news release."

    Adoption is an option to consider, outside of abortion.

    PlaffelvohfenYeshuaRedeemed
Sign In or Register to comment.

Back To Top

DebateIsland.com

| The Best Online Debate Experience!
2019 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
Awesome Debates
BestDealWins.com
Terms of Service

Get In Touch