Return to CreateDebate.comjaded • Join this debate community

Joe_Cavalry All Day Every Day


Debate Info

11
25
True. Wait..., what? No!!!
Debate Score:36
Arguments:45
Total Votes:36
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 True. (10)
 
 Wait..., what? No!!! (24)

Debate Creator

jolie(9810) pic



An alternative to abortions.

 

Abortion is too harsh of an option for a fetus.  A fetus should be put under government care until he's ready to join society.  Abortion not only renders the society blood-thirsty and inhuman, but also incites other anti-social activities.

Now, replace the word "Abortion" with the words "The Death Penalty" and the word "Fetus" with the word "Violent Criminal."

True.

Side Score: 11
VS.

Wait..., what? No!!!

Side Score: 25
2 points

i know that we all wouldnt want to just kill the baby if they were on earth for at least a week so why kill the baby before seeing that if in the future the baby might just help you

Side: True.
1 point

We seem to hold innocent fetuses to a higher standard than violent criminals.

Side: True.
1 point

I have never met a fetus I did not like.

But I have met some violent criminals who I was not very fond of.

Side: True.
1 point

I don't understand the point of this debate. Aren't you saying that you either need to support the death penalty and abortion, or oppose both. Don't a majority of people believe one is ok and the other isn't? Aren't you one of those people?

Side: True.
1 point

instead of killing the child why dont let this be a child of the government then the government would give the baby to someone who can care for the child

Side: True.

Well she has copied my exact point I've mentioned in the debate"Should violent repeat offenders get death penalty";quite astonishing to see my comment getting so much abused.

Side: True.

A fetus should be put under government care until he's ready to join society.

That would make pregnant women property of the state.

Abortion not only renders the society blood-thirsty and inhuman, but also incites other anti-social activities.

How so?

Now, replace the word "Abortion" with the words "The Death Penalty" and the word "Fetus" with the word "Violent Criminal."

I replaced the words, the found the topic to be complete nonsense. The analogy really does not work.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

I replaced the words, the found the topic to be complete nonsense. The analogy really does not work.

It looks like the original argument was about the death penalty and he did the replacement. The fact that you pointed out what's wrong with the statement he provided demonstrates that.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

There are already too many children waiting to be adopted. They grow up in foster care going from home to home and never have a true childhood like the rest of us because a lot of them never feel the true love of a parent.

And you want to add to that?

I'm not sure why you so adamantly want to defend something with no brain activity and no beating heart. Sure it has the potential to become a baby, but an apple seed has the potential to become an apple tree and cutting down a tree is much different that destroying a seed.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

Well, how about if we legalize retroactive abortions? That way we can provide some relief to the over congested foster care system?

BTW, I know individuals who came from the foster care system. Some from friends. One from within my own family. I know for a fact that those adopted individuals would disagree with you. I know that not all are a success story but to portray the foster care system as... a waste? Seems... irresponsible. For all its faults, it does some good. Maybe we can focus on the good. If you want to debate whether it does more harm than good... I don't know.

As far as the last paragraph, check my response to TheEccentric below.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
MKIced(2511) Clarified
2 points

I'm not saying the foster care system is perfect nor is it a disaster. I'm just saying there are children still awaiting adoption and it's irresponsible to just dump more and more kids into that system.

Side: True.

The woman's body=her rules.

Furthermore the death penalty version of that statement is false as violent criminals should never be given a chance to rejoin society. If you've murdered somebody you've burn't your bridges, I'm afraid.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

I guess we have to show that the fetus is only part of the mother so that she can have it removed as one would remove a wart.

We also have to show that the fetus is NOT part of the father so that we can claim that the father has no claim, no rights, no interest, no say in the life/fate of the fetus and that ONLY the mother has the final say in the life/fate of the fetus.

Do you remember this debate?

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ What camefirsttheChickenortheegg

In there it talks about the whether the egg shell belongs to the fetus or the mother and whether the eggshell is just a container.

I would argue that the uterus is part of the mother.

I would also argue that the uterus is a container.

I would then argue that the fetus is not part of the father. Just because the father contributed sperm, does NOT mean that the fetus is part of the father.

I would then argue that the fetus is not part of the mother either. I mean, just because she contributed the egg does not mean that the fetus is part of her body. What holds true for the father, holds true for the mother. And science backs me up on this. The mother's immune system would kill the fetus if it weren't for the placenta.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Immunetolerancein_pregnancy

"The placenta functions as an immunological barrier between the mother and the fetus, creating an immunologically privileged site."

If it were not for the placenta, the mother's immune system would kill the fetus. The fetus is its own entity. Once the egg and the sperm fuse, it is no longer part of the father and it is no longer part of the mother. it is its own entity.

But... if the fetus is its own entity, and it is not part of the mother, it cannot be compared to a wart. When the mother has a fetus removed, she is not doing something to her body, she is doing something to another living entity.

But wait...

don't get mad...

or defensive...

yet.

We still have to deal with, "is it a thinking entity?"

In other words, you may still have an argument to abort as many fetuses as you see fit and I'll have to mull that over.

Please note, I did not dispute you. ;)

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
MKIced(2511) Clarified
1 point

it is its own entity.

I just want to point out that under that reasoning, a parasite is also its own entity. And so is a tumor.

Side: True.
1 point

I never said it was part of the woman's body. The fact is it is inside her body, living off it, feeding off her bloodstream. Therefore the woman can kick it out and remove it if she wants. The fetus is a parasite.

Side: True.
Jace(5211) Clarified
1 point

What exactly is your rationale regarding violent offenders? Is it derived from a social contract premise, recidivism premise, etc? Do you apply it only in the case of murder or to all violent offenders?

Side: True.
1 point

Or name it "O.J that bitch!" You know beat the shit out of a woman but once again I say Condomman could have stopped this

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

Abortion is too harsh of an option for a fetus. A fetus should be put under government care until he's ready to join society. Abortion not only renders the society blood-thirsty and inhuman, but also incites other anti-social activities.

This already does not make sense.

Can't really do anything with this debate if the premise does not make sense.

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
1 point

Which sentence in particular?

During an abortion, the fetus is ripped apart. Sounds pretty harsh.

Adoptions instead of abortions. Is that better?

Now that we have abortions, people are calling fetuses parasites. That's pretty anti-social if you ask me. But I could probably tone it down or remove it all together. OK, how about I delete the third sentence? Would that make it better?

Side: Wait..., what? No!!!
flewk(1193) Clarified
1 point

A fetus should be put under government care until he's ready to join society.

How does the government support a fetus? No one has developed the technology to do this yet.

Abortion not only renders the society blood-thirsty and inhuman, but also incites other anti-social activities.

How is this true? Are you saying that women who have had abortions tend to be more blood-thirsty, inhuman, and anti-social?

Side: True.