- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
The etymology of a word is not dispositive of whether the word's meaning is ambiguous among the general public.
If you are anti-abortion morally, you can still believe that the ultimate choice should be legal for a woman to make - thus fitting descriptions for both pro-life and pro-choice.
I think there is ambiguity in the term which leads to the problem. Some of its adherents believe it means preferring life and some think it means banning abortion.
The term "pro-life" only denotes per se that life is to be preferred, and technically says nothing about its legality. This is exactly the confusion I am seeking to illuminate.
regulations balancing individual rights and public safety are not the same as the government coming for your guns.
censorship of religious expression in public
saying you shouldn't use my tax dollars to lead your kid in school prayer is not the same thing as "censorship of religious expression in public"
lie of separation of church & state
We use the phrase wall of separation between church & state to refer to the 1st Amendment - just like Thomas Jefferson did.
forced paying for abortions
Obamacare was written to comply with the Hyde amendment banning Federal money for abortion except in case of rape, incest or to protect the life of the mother and Obama issued Executive Order 13535 stating the same.
The provision of Obamacare allowing women access to birth control without a co-pay will likely reduce abortions and teen pregnancies ref
forced buying of Obamacare
mandatory insurance was a conservative "personal responsibility" idea, before it was a liberal compromise health-care plan.
I can not remember the names & dates of every news story pointing out College censorship of Conservative speakers.
We aren't asking for every, just any...
For a second your post switched to the Yes side, but now it is back under No.
I'll bite: why not? (I feel a semantic argument with the debate title coming on.)
P.S. Here is my post from 3 years ago saying largely what I told Dana/Sitara about people who could be considered both.
I don't know if you got this from my post
Not sure I have seen your post on it, but it is something I have run into several times most recently with Dana - thought I would create it as a debate on its own.
I describe myself as both.
Did you mean to post your answer under "Yes"?
the only option to save the mothers life
What if it isn't to save the mother's life, but to save her ovaries or protect her from other organ damage, or to protect her financially, or...
complications or other abnormal factors
might be a bit convoluded, but I think this is a good place to mention rape. Does allowing only for "abnormal factors" rely on some level of consent to sex carrying with it the consent to the normal risks associated with pregnancy?
Immediate specific danger, not statistical potential danger.
All danger is in the form of statistical potential danger.
I wouldn't have a dog put down because it was a 'threatening breed' like a put bull, I wouldn't have a dog put down because it had a history of biting when its tail was pulled. I would have a dog put down if it was in the habit of attacking with little or no provocation.
This would mean that no abortion could be preventative - you must wait until the fetus creates an actual injury or death to take action.
Sure, pregnancy carries some level of risk with it, but that's not what is being examined here.
the danger can be readily alleviated by an emergency c-section or induced labor
Induced labor after 12 weeks but before viability would be an abortion, correct?
An abortion procedure itself is not without risk for the mother
But generally less danger than the pregnancy. ref
I'm not talking about 'increased danger' statistically
I was referring more to the same rights as animals - if an animal poses a danger, then I would assume you would believe it should be legal to put it down (or at least give it away, which before viability is not really an option during pregnancy.)
About CreateDebateThe CreateDebate Blog
Take a Tour
Sharing ToolsInvite Your Friends
RSS & XML Feeds
Basic StuffUser Agreement