CreateDebate


Debate Info

433
512
against abortion for abortion
Debate Score:945
Arguments:536
Total Votes:1080
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 against abortion (269)
 
 for abortion (240)

Debate Creator

Jawkins20(138) pic



Abortion is it right or wrong?

I think we all agree murder is wrong, so why do some people think abortion is right and ok to do? That contricicts saying you are against murder, yet condoning it with abortion. 

against abortion

Side Score: 433
VS.

for abortion

Side Score: 512
9 points

Looks like some parallels between abortion and slavery, if you think abortion is ok then you agree also with slavery.

Slavery in centuries past and abortions in this century were defended and promoted by the same arguments. Consider the case in the USA: In 1857, in the Dred Scott case, the US Supreme Court decided, by a 7 to 2 majority, that according to the US Constitution, black people were not legal persons. They were the property of the owner. He could buy, or sell, or even kill them. Abolitionists had objected. The ruling was outrageous, they said. It was immoral and discriminated against an entire class of living persons solely on the basis of skin colour. But those who supported slavery argued that if those who had a moral objection to slavery, didn't have to own slaves. No one was forcing them to own slaves. But they also said: "Don't force your morality on the slave owner. He has the right to choose to own slaves if he wishes."

In a very similar decision just over one hundred years later, in 1973, in the Roe vs Wade Decision, the US Supreme Court decided that according to the US Constitution, by the same 7 to 2 majority, that unborn people were not legal persons. They had no civil rights, no human rights and were therefore, legally the property of the owner (the mother). She had the absolute legal right to keep or destroy her unborn baby. Pro-life people objected. The ruling was outrageous, they said. It was immoral and discriminated against an entire class of living people solely on the basis of age (too young) and place of residence (the womb). But those who support abortion argue that those who have a moral objection to abortion, don't have to have abortions. The pro-abortionists say: "No one is fordcing you to have an abortion. But don't force your morality on the mother. She has a right to choose to kill her developing baby if she wishes."

Abraham Lincoln in the 19th century said: "No one has the right to do what is wrong." 6

This country has just ended discrimination based on race. Are we now going to start discrimination on the basis of age? Saying:"I'm older than you, I'm bigger than you, I have a voice - therefore I can kill you."

Side: against abortion
5 points

Alright, this is a great argument. In the end this is going to get down to a simple opinion: Does life begin at conception, or at birth? I believe it's birth, you believe it's conception.

If someone gets raped, I believe that if they so wish, they may get an abortion, thus killing the child who is, in my mind, not yet truly a living human being.

As you said,

This country has just ended discrimination based on race. Are we now going to start discrimination on the basis of age?

I know that this is an unrelated question, but do you believe in gay marriage? If the answer is no, you are contradicting yourself. Discrimination based on age and discrimination based on sexual orientation...yeah a bit off topic. Just curious.

Side: for abortion
mommybrock Disputed
1 point

like i said it has a heartbeat memory intelegence therefore it is qualified as living and its heart beat is tottally seperate from the mother therefore yes its a human being my aunt was raped and had an abortion and says every day she regrets it bcuz she knows it was not the babys fault what happened and she is worse than the man who raped her for killing her own baby

Side: against abortion
OODaddy(127) Disputed
4 points

Very interesting !!! However in referring to Dredd Scott you defeat your own agreement. As you state "It was immoral and discriminated against an entire class of living persons solely on the basis of skin colour." The key phrase here is "living person", IMO and in the opinion of most doctors a zygote or a blastophere is not alive. IMO a fetus in the 3rd trimester is alive, and like many pro-freedom/pro-choice folks I support (reasonable) late term abortion bans.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
4 points

Abortion stops a beating heart, Daddy. No mammal can exist without a beating heart, so when an abortion is performed, a life is extinguished.

Side: against abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
4 points

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_popout&v;=fKyljukBE70#!A

Now, you tell me from the moment of conception, this marvelously created being is NOT a human, not a person? If you do, you are a fool, and it's futile to argue against such foolishness.

Side: against abortion
Conoir(16) Disputed
4 points

True, a fetutus life-ness might be considered not trully alive, but an interesting thing about defining something as alive is that they must go though the basic life processes, including reproduction. Since abortion is interfering with the natural act of reproduction, abortion is going against part of what makes us alive.

Side: against abortion
dkforizzle(175) Disputed
4 points

The 'parallels' between slavery and abortion that you have proposed are absolutely disgusting. You have made up a correlation between these things when there really isn't one. Your correlation is based solely on how the two issues were handled in the US Court System. Seeing as though both issues went through the same reasoning and debate process obviously they will be handled in the same way and appear to be alike. Pro choicers do not discriminate against the fetus' because of their age, they discriminate against them because they are not even developed human beings. They have no human faculties. They are piles of cells. A dog has no legal rights in this country because it is not a developed human being and has no human faculties. Laws only apply to people, not the blueprints of people. Lets say for instance that 10 workers plan to build a house from scratch. They have no materials, only their knowledge of houses. Are the 10 workers a house? No, they are the potential of a house. The cells of a fetus are the workers and humans are the house. You argument has no intellectual or moral basis and is cemented in an argument which compares the legal process' of two different ideas which were run through the same system. The fact that your argument has so much support just shows how ignorant the people against abortion are on this website.

Side: for abortion
3 points

You made another amazing point, Jawkins. I never thought about it that way, in connection with slavery. But what you stated was right on. Same arguments, same bad decisions.

Side: against abortion
ta9798(313) Disputed
1 point

The arguments while appearing similar are not.

I slavery there is a minium of 2 roles, the slave and the master. The master projects his authority over the slave.

However in the case of the pro-life view there are a minimum of three roles involved, the woman, the unborn child, and the pro-life church. Your argument tries to link the unborn child to the slave and the mother to the master, but you fail to take into account the relationship of the pro-life church. The role of the the pro-life church like the slave master over the mother.

This of course all relies on the the belief of when fetus is considered a person. If you look at the pro-choice view, there is a longer period of time before the fetus is considered a person. In this view, the slave analogy, the only relationship left is the mother as the slave to the will of the pro-life church master.

The problem that many pro-choice people have with people trying to take away abortion rights is that the pro-life church is using the Government to impose the church's will on a selection of other people that there is absolutely no doubt to them being actual people. The government should not enforce religious ideology on those who do not agree with that Ideology but the pro-life stance demands just that. Many good Christians detest and are outraged with the state mandated religious laws forcing Muslim women in Iran and Afghanistan to wear hijabs or burqas. Why should the Christian church be able to force it's views on the women of the United States?

Abortions should be a last resort, and it is something only a woman with the accurate and honest advice of a doctor can decide on. No church, no government, no body else has the right to insert themselves into this situation. And even if we agree that the fetus is a person much earlier, that still does not mean the church or a politician can speak for that unborn child so they still have no right to interfere.

Side: for abortion
6 points

Technically abortion is murder. They are killing the baby without a justified motive. Simply because having a baby would be an inconvenience is the same as killing your parents simply because their existence would be inconvenient for you, and that would be murder right?

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
1 point

No, that would be incorrect. It would not be murder, because the fetus is not a person. It has not acquired any of the qualities of person hood until like week 22-25 or something like that.

They are killing the baby without a justified motive.

It's a fetus, not a person.

Side: for abortion
JasonLing(10) Disputed
3 points

Fetus is the same compared to a person, just that fetus is not fully developed. Thus, a fetus deserve the right to live in this world.

Side: against abortion
Nichole_XXX(8) Disputed
2 points

Im pro-choice but do not sit there and act like it wasnt taking a human life, its still heartbreaking to think sombody just took the life of a baby that somone else could have loved, I think abortion laws and adoption laws are flawed and are the cause of these debates. Yes a women should do whatever she wants becouse it is her body however it shows she is an evil person if she just didnt feel like raising a child over having sex without protection.

Side: against abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

Fetus means little one. How do you not know this, Markie? What has your public edumication afforded you, except to turn you away from the Truth which is Jesus? By the way, I was raised Catholic and at the age of nine, I remember vividly the day a priest lied to us about the Bible being filled with nice fairy tales. At the age of eighteen I knew the evolution I was learning in biology class was lies too. Way before I accepted Jesus Christ as my Lord and Saviour, my spirit was in tune with the Truth which is Jesus.

Side: against abortion
madelynjwood(18) Disputed
1 point

It is a person! Just because it is not fully developed does not mean that it is worthless.

Side: against abortion
4 points

I get tired of hearing women say it's my body, my choice. Well after you become pregnant it's NO longer just your body, your choice. What about your baby's body and choice. I bet if you ask the baby, he/she would say give me a chance at life, rather than have it snuffed out. To those women that say it's my body, my choice, why is it fair you had a chance at life, but you refuse to afford your baby the same chance at life. If you get rid of, make something stop living, that is murder. If you cut up an apple, make it juice, or sauce, the bottom line is, it's still an apple. Murder is murder no matter how you label it or twist it, murder is murder.

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
7 points

I get tired of hearing women say it's my body, my choice

Oh, so apparently it's your choice then? You get to dictate what women can or cannot do with their bodies now.

I bet if you ask the baby, he/she would say give me a chance at life, rather than have it snuffed out.

This is irrelevant, for it is impossible anyways. Babies can't even talk until weeks/months after birth. And if you were a fetus, you wouldn't be aware of your existence or non existence.

To those women that say it's my body, my choice, why is it fair you had a chance at life, but you refuse to afford your baby the same chance at life.

Isn't the baby biologically dependent upon the mother for life?

Consider this: Person X is dying because he needs a kidney. Person Y is the only person in the world who has a kidney that his body won't reject. Under your previous logic with abortion, police and doctors would force Person Y to give up his kidney in order to save this man.

Compare it to abortion. The fetus needs the mother, just as Person X needs the kidney. Without the mother, the fetus dies. Without the kidney, Person X dies. So your solution is to force the mother to continue the pregnancy, and force Person Y to give up his kidney to save Person X.

Fetal viability becomes possible around week 24-25, meaning the fetus can survive outside of the uterus with the assistance of medical technology.

Side: for abortion
5 points

WOW !!! Your kidney argument is the first new argument on this subject I've seen in years. Powerful logic.

Side: for abortion
ASHenry(7) Disputed
3 points

Doctors can not FORCE someone to give up their organs and if they is being practiced here in America it is illegal and should be reported.

Side: against abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
1 point

Oh my that's rediculous! For one, your example of person x and y as a comparative example to the dependency a fetus has to the carrying mother is not remotely related at all. Someone who needs a kidney from someone wasn't somebody they depended on to live to begin with! In a collective political society such as what we live in as human beings your damn right it's our choice to say weather a woman can have or not have an abortion. People make decisions everyday that to them it's a personal decision but fail to realize as a society it affects everyone. It's irrelevant if a fetus is aware of it's life when it comes to justifying its death by a means of escaping responsibility... are you nuts?

Side: against abortion
Blah123(43) Disputed
3 points

"I bet if you ask the baby, he/she would say give me a chance at life, rather than have it snuffed out."

When a baby is aborted, he/she is not nearly capable of intelligent thought.

Think about rape victims though. Imagine you are a woman (or if you are a woman, then just imagine the scenario) who gets raped. After you were raped, you were brutally beaten and left to die. But you didn't die, you were saved just in time and taken to the hospital. Now a few weeks have gone by and you are still shook up. This is something you will never fully get over and you will always remember the man's face. You now suffer from depression and have trouble going out in public. You eventually return to the hospital and discover that you are pregnant with the man's baby. The man who raped you. The child will obviously look like his/her father to an extent. A constant reminder of what happened to you. Now imagine the problems the child will have after discovering that his father was/is a rapist.

What if the woman was a teenager?

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
4 points

The famous gospel singer, Ethel Waters, was a product of rape. Her mother was 13 years old when she became pregnant with Ethel, and what a tremendous blessing Ethel Waters was to this dark world! A light for Jesus Christ, King of kings and Lord of lords! Praise God Ethel was not ruthlessly, violently slaughtered while in her young mother's womb!

Side: against abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
1 point

Yes rape is unfortunate, but in no way is it the babies fault, therefor simply disposing of the baby is not the right option. In fact murder should not be an option. Life is a precious gift, and EVERYONE even babies conceived in rape should have the equal right at life. I would like to think if asked, people conceived in rape are happy their mothers choice life for them. Now ask yourself, what if you found out that you were conceived in rape, would you have wished to not be here? I like to think not, I also think most everyone appreciates their chance at life and honors their mothers for choosing life.

Side: against abortion
3 points

Agreed. I'm tired of hearing that as well.

The normal human desire, a lot of times right up to the last breath, is to stay alive, to keep living. We struggle for survival when we're sick, in many ways that we are not even conscious of. The body's natural fight is for life, not death. People commit suicide when they are emotionally ill.

And I'm tired of other woman arguing that it's not a 'baby' until it's able to survive on it's own. What is it, then, a puppy? People treat the unborn no better than a bagful of cats they would drown in a lake. It's horrendous.

That attitude fulfills a Bible scripture (2 Timothy 3:1-5), where it was stated that people would "have no natural affection."

Any woman that could abort their baby has no natural affection, even if it is rape. Kill the rapist rather than the baby.

Side: against abortion
Elvira(3446) Disputed
2 points

So a woman in a high flying career/ looking forwards to finishing university/ sixth form or even secondary school should give up their future for the sake of an unwanted child?

Side: for abortion
funnylookink(17) Disputed
2 points

It IS a woman's body, and it IS a woman's choice. A woman's uterus is essentially a breeding ground for the potential of a human life to develop -- is it a sin when a woman miscarries? After all, she indirectly had a hand in the destruction of a human life.

What about if a woman gets raped, either by a relative of hers or by a complete stranger? Was it HER body, HER choice for her body to be mutilated by a man? The argument you present would insist that a woman MUST go through with her pregnancy regardless of the terms, whether it be rape, incest, or whether the woman's life is in danger as a result of the pregnancy. We no longer live in the 1700s, we do not have to live by the archaic rules of society set forth for us back then. We are a progressive society by nature and we should allow women the opportunity to exercise complete control over their bodies -- whether or not they decide to abort their pregnancy is THEIR choice, NOT yours.

Side: for abortion
DeerSlayer13(14) Disputed
3 points

U guys just don't get it! It isn't just a women's body. There is a human being inside of her. It's illegal to murder any human being and nobody can argue that murder isn't wrong. So why are we killing little babies. You must have never seen or held a newborn baby if you think that it is okay to kill them. They can't even speak for themselves. It's just plain wrong. In the cases of rape, the woman does not need to keep the baby, she can put it up for adoption where it at least has a chance to live.

Side: against abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
2 points

When a woman is pregnant, her baby is NOT part of her body! Her body is nourishing her baby, and the baby has its own DNA, different from the mother's. Heck, her baby may even be a boy. For folks to say the baby is part of the mother's body is ludicrous. If any part of a woman's body is cut off, that severed part cannot survive on its own. If, however, the baby is removed from the mother's body, depending on the age of the little one, the baby can survive out of the mother's body, because it is a separate individual.

Side: against abortion
burnjuan(59) Disputed
1 point

Until it is out of the womb and surviving on it's own, it is only a potential human.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
2 points

It you say. It? Tell that to my young daughter who traveled joyfully to the birthing center to deliver her first child, only to leave with empty arms! Why was it so hard for us to even breathe for a long time after her birth? You're telling me that a mere blob caused us broken hearts? Why did my daughter's full breasts, and an empty cradle cause us such devastation? Why is my daughter saving all her pennies to purchase a grave marker for her full term, seven pound - 9 ounce, still born daughter if she wasn't a human yet? What was the point of my daughter naming my first granddarling? What was the reason for us to take her tiny lifeless body to have her prepared for burial? What was the point of her memorial services? Why do we longingly visit her grave and decorate it? Why do we miss her at every holiday and birthday? Why do we miss her when we think of all the milestones we are missing with her? Why will we miss her for the rest of our lives? Are we really only shedding tears over a potential baby? Is our profound grief for just a blob of potentiality?

Side: against abortion
Abbott(162) Disputed
1 point

I get tired of hearing women say it's my body, my choice.

okay so you're a man

Well after you become pregnant it's NO longer just your body, your choice. What about your baby's body and choice

I'm sorry but uhh..."my baby"'s body is INSIDE my body. Remember, my house my rules. in this case MEN don't have a house so they should shut up sit down and let the WOMEN figure this out.

To those women that say it's my body, my choice, why is it fair you had a chance at life, but you refuse to afford your baby the same chance at life.

To the men that want to give their input on my life...STFU. this baby was conceived out of RAPE, INCEST, or will KILL ME if i have it... just think if that baby is born. i will hate it. because it will be a constant reminder of the wrongs that were done to me. then abuse will start. and that baby would wish s/he were dead! is that anyway for a child to live?

but honestly all that shit you said is IMMEDIATELY shut down by the simple fact that you are a man and should not get to chose what happens with a woman's body Bottom line!

Side: for abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
1 point

What does that woman need to get pregnant, a man. Therefor a man has a right to say something about the woman aborting his child. Takes two to tango. Call me a butt hole all you want, but my job is to speak the Truth and try to punch holes in all this darkness. I would rather be called a butt hole than a coward, I call it how it is, murder is murder and when a woman has an abortion that is murder. I am a God pleaser not a man pleaser.

Side: against abortion
3 points

It's interesting that when a pregnant woman is murdered, no matter what stage the baby is at, if it perishes the murderer can be tried for a double murder. In that case, you tell me when life starts.

Side: against abortion
3 points

Touche! You just made a slam dunk, Jawkins, or even a 3-pointer! :)

Side: against abortion
2 points

Great point. And that is only man's law. God's law is even higher than that.

It seems so odd to me that the worth of human life is entirely subjective. Whatever the individuals involved in it value, that is the bottom line. But that is, again, their viewpoint alone. They are playing God with something they have no right to do that with.

If you don't want to get pregnant, the time not to is BEFORE conception. Afterward, shoulder your responsibility and don't add murder to your list of sins all of us have..

Side: against abortion
2 points

Really like this point, I call it manning up, in the woman's case womanning up, if you do an action own up to it and shoulder your responsibility. Don't go hide behind a society that's saying it's o k to kill your very own flesh and blood. All the abortion system cares about is MONEY, and they couldn't care less about you or the pain your'e going to experience for the rest of your life. Think about all the birthdays, Christmases, camping trips, sleep overs, ect. Gone because you chose to kill your child, how sickening truly this is. PLEASE wake up people this is MURDER we are talking about!

Side: against abortion
2 points

Great point. however these kind of laws are highly selective. Tobacco is one of the more powerful aborticides, yet I am unware of any that pregnant women who smoke having been charged with manslaughter. By the way should an unborn child be counted in the census ?

Side: against abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
1 point

Census goes by people that have a social security card and birth certificate. Those aren't required to grant life!

Side: against abortion
MrPrime(268) Disputed
2 points

This is because you have to assume the mother wanted to keep the baby. Also, this is more prejudice against murderers (which is ok in my opinion). While this is fun anecdote you can't compare the two. No body is going to argue against this "technical mistake". Prosecutors call this murder to bolster their case, but technically, it's not.

Side: for abortion
MrPrime(268) Disputed
2 points

This is because you have to assume the mother wanted to keep the baby. Also, this is more prejudice against murderers (which is ok in my opinion). While this is fun anecdote you can't compare the two. No body is going to argue against this "technical mistake". Prosecutors call this murder to bolster their case, but technically, it's not.

Side: for abortion
1 point

Oh my gosh awesome! That is just another example of the contradiction of abortion.

Side: against abortion
Abbott(162) Disputed
1 point

Thats a good point. very good im actluy surprised at the argument thumbs up for that...but my counter is that that family was expecting a baby( even if they were thinking about abortion the law doesnt go that deep into you life so it doesnt matter) so in that situation Yes, it is double murder One life and one potential life.

Side: for abortion
3 points

The day after conception? Okay. The day before due? Wrong.

Side: against abortion
Jawkins20(138) Clarified
2 points

Anytime after sex and pregnancy confirmation, it is wrong and it is murder.

Side: against abortion
Hellno(17618) Disputed
2 points

Who are you?

And... I'm not wild about it... but in the case of rape or the life of the mother I'm okay with it if it's done very early on, like only in the first trimester-ish.

Side: for abortion
1 point

I agree with you on that point because yours makes sense. you should talk to the rest of the people on your side because their thinking of automaticly acusing the women of wrong doing is bull shit

Side: for abortion
2 points

We dehumanized the jews, we dehumanized the blacks, we dehumanized women and now we dehumanize the unborn. I wonder who's next...

The right to life is the most absolute fundamental good we have. Throughout history we've kept trying to justify the oppression and killing of other human beings by coming up with arbitrary criteria that excludes them from the right to life. Right now, that criteria is essentially the level of development.

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
3 points

Throughout history we've kept trying to justify the oppression and killing of other human beings by coming up with arbitrary criteria that excludes them from the right to life.

The arbitrary criteria throughout history are one thing, right now it's something different. It is no longer arbitrary. I believe the fetus is a person when the brain finally becomes sufficiently "wired" if you will, at roughly ~25 weeks.

Side: for abortion
3 points

The fetus is a separate person at conception, and as long as it keeps on growing with life in it.

The woman is not going to give birth to anything else but a human being. Not a puppy, not a kitten, a human being.

It is not arbitrary, that is a fact.

Side: for abortion
VecVeltro(412) Disputed
2 points

What does ''sufficiently wired'' actually mean? And why 25 weeks? Why not 25 weeks and 4 hours? Or 26 weeks? Accuracy is paramount here because inaccuracy may result in the death of your person.

By attributing the right to life to the functionality of a single organ cheapens and undermines the whole concept of this absolute right. I do not cease to be a human being simply because my brain is damaged, my brain dies or my brain gets removed or because my brain isn't developed enough. I may cease being a person, but to me personhood is irrelevant and yet another arbitrary criteria.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Someone who has an abortion is either immature, selfish, uneducated or just plain cruel. It's like drinking, they want to drink but not deal with the hangover. They want to have sex and not deal with the baby that comes with sex. How selfish of someone to want to kill their own son/daughter. There are many disputes on which when the baby is actually a baby. That is not the point, the point is, when you have sex and get pregnant a child will come from that. Do yourself a favor and really think out the consequences of an abortion before blindly doing it. If you don't want the responsibility then give the baby up for adoption, that is what you owe your child. The right to life, make a stand for those that can't yet stand up for themselves.

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
3 points

Someone who has an abortion is either immature, selfish, uneducated or just plain cruel.

This is not true in every case. Do not make idiotic blanket statements like this.

They want to have sex and not deal with the baby that comes with sex.

It logically follows from this statement that sex should ONLY be performed when you want a baby. Sex for pleasure, prohibited. Sex for reproduction ONLY.

Do you hold these views?

How selfish of someone to want to kill their own son/daughter.

The thing is, it's not a person yet. Therefore, no harm done.

If you don't want the responsibility then give the baby up for adoption, that is what you owe your child.

It's not your choice to make. What if she doesn't want to go through giving birth to a child? It's her choice, not yours. You have no right to force her to continue a pregnancy. She should be able to abort the baby if she wants to.

The right to life, make a stand for those that can't yet stand up for themselves.

Up until ~25 weeks, they have no awareness or knowledge of their own existence. If they were aborted right there, they wouldn't know the difference.

Side: for abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
2 points

Hey man there are ways around an abortion, no matter what happened they can choose life. Why don't you put yourself in the babies shoes that are aborted, then ask yourself would you like a chance at life? The baby might not be able to answer then, but down the road they sure can. I hold the views that sex out of wedlock is wrong, and when you are married of course I believe in being able to have sex with your partner for pleasure. However most females having abortions are very young and immature, they're in many ways unable to make a rash decision regarding abortion. Many that do have abortions regret it terribly, so it seems it's the wrong choice all around. I know I am glad my mom chose life, aren't you.

Side: against abortion
JasonLing(10) Disputed
2 points

"How selfish of someone to want to kill their own son/daughter.

The thing is, it's not a person yet. Therefore, no harm done."

No doubt that a fetus is not a person, but a not fully developed person. However, a fetus is also a life that deserve the right to live.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Just to clarify for the people that say there isn't proof of God's existence, here are some pretty solid proofs.

First, the non-existence of God cannot be proven. One cannot prove a universal negative. Alternatively, the existence of God is provable.

The concept, design, and intricate details of our world necessitate an intelligent designer.

Both direct and indirect evidence for God’s existence are well known and well documented. Nothing in history is better known or better documented than the birth, life, death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. We even use the year of His birth as the basis for our calendar. He perfectly matched the over 100 unique Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament regarding His birth, life, death, and resurrection. The laws of probability cannot give us a reasonable explanation for either the Messianic predictions or the resurrection, let alone both by the same person.

Jesus’ miracles were witnessed by many and were documented redundantly for additional corroboration. He was seen by at least 500 people after His resurrection. He was seen ascending into heaven. His transfiguration was seen by Peter, James, and John. His wisdom in dealing with many circumstances was astounding. He never promoted Himself or His miracles. C. S. Lewis stated that He couldn’t have just been a good teacher. He was either a liar, lunatic, or Lord. He didn’t even come close to meeting the profile of a liar or lunatic, so He had to be God.

Jesus Christ also supported the truth of the Old Testament and quoted it many times. Consequently, with Jesus Christ, we have an eyewitness to the truth of the Old Testament. This gives credibility to the creation account and God’s interaction with man. The entire Old Testament account is about how God is trying to have a relationship with man while man is separating himself from God by sin. It tells how God is long-suffering and merciful and ultimately how God sent His Son to die for our sins so God could ultimately have a relationship with us.

God’s interaction with man in the Old Testament was often and powerful. Some of the main interactions included Adam, Cain, Enoch, Noah, Abraham, Jacob, Moses, Joshua, the Israelites, the prophets, and the kings. In addition to Jesus’ testimony to the truth of the Old Testament, ancient manuscripts, archaeology, and internal consistency also testify to its truth. Consequently, much direct evidence including eyewitness accounts and indirect evidence corroborate the existence of God and the truth of the Bible.

My point is to not start another debate inside this debate, just to give you some evidence of God's existence.

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
3 points

The concept, design, and intricate details of our world necessitate an intelligent designer.

False. Complexity does not indicate intelligent design. Intelligent design was never a reputable argument for god.

He perfectly matched the over 100 unique Messianic prophecies in the Old Testament regarding His birth, life, death, and resurrection.

Like what?

Jesus’ miracles were witnessed by many and were documented redundantly for additional corroboration. He was seen by at least 500 people after His resurrection. He was seen ascending into heaven. His transfiguration was seen by Peter, James, and John.

All irrelevant and invalid as proof of god. Eye witness testimony is not proof, nor is it good evidence. Personal testimony is notoriously unreliable.

This gives credibility to the creation account and God’s interaction with man.

No it doesn't.

Consequently, much direct evidence including eyewitness accounts and indirect evidence corroborate the existence of God

Like what? Eyewitness accounts are not good evidence, it's terrible evidence.

Side: for abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
3 points

Creation points to a Creator, things just don't create themselves. If you went on a space ship ride to mars, saw there were buildings there, you would assume that someone or something designed them, then created them.

Read the Old Testament and find out. Go ask a Theologian, I am sure he would answer any of your questions.

IF you don't believe documents and peoples testimonies of his existence to be true, then clearly you must not believe in any History. So I guess George Washington didn't exist because all we have are historical evidence based off events and peoples encounters.

Side: against abortion
JasonLing(10) Disputed
2 points

"Jesus’ miracles were witnessed by many and were documented redundantly for additional corroboration. He was seen by at least 500 people after His resurrection. He was seen ascending into heaven. His transfiguration was seen by Peter, James, and John.

All irrelevant and invalid as proof of god. Eye witness testimony is not proof, nor is it good evidence. Personal testimony is notoriously unreliable."

You are just like the pharisees and the teacher of law during the time of Jesus. We give you proof and testimony that there is a God, yet you say that they are unreliable. We don't give you proof and testimony and you say that there is no proof and evident of the existence of God.

Side: against abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

What makes your life so sad that you must spew forth venom directed at Christians? If you sought God, you would find Him, for He would make Himself known to you. Instead of living for God and others, you would rather live selfishly. You want no accountability; you want to feel no pain that comes with shame; you desire free love, and disregard the reality of an afterlife due to knowing where you would go after living a life of sin here. As Jesus said, "Repent and believe."

Side: against abortion
2 points

Folks, get real, the main reason you all are pro-death is that you don't want your plans for free love spoiled. Am I right? Am I right? Am I right, right right?

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
1 point

You must be completely delusional. Nobody is pro death here.

People in the opposition oppose the restriction of womans rights. Nor do we consider it "murder". And it is not an arbitrary definition of who is and who is not a person. It is scientifically validated based on studies of the brain, fetal development, cognition, and fetal viability.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

Abortion stops a beating heart, Mark. That is murderous. So what if those in the opposition here do not consider abortion to be murder. It is murder whether or not you believe it to be.

Side: against abortion
2 points

To everyone that calls it a cell, blob, fetus, baby, once something starts to live and you willfully stop making it live. This means you killed it. I don't see how hard this is to understand, murder is murder, killing is killing.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Abortion proves not only bad for the woman's mental health, but also our society's mental health. when an abortion effects the state of the women's mental health, that in fact is going to effect the mental health of our society due to the number of abortions done each year. Think how many mentally unhealthy women we have in our society due to abortion. This will in fact spread to others that know them, come into contact with them and basically making us pretty mentally unhealthy society. So there proves another reason why it's not just the baby that suffers, it shows plenty others suffer after an abortion as well.

Side: against abortion
2 points

according to me... abortion is the worst technique formed by man... its goin against the working nature or a human being... u hav no right to kill anyone juss because u had fun few months back...!! bt still, in india atleast, most of the girl child is droped by her own parents...!! wht the hell...!!

Side: against abortion
2 points

abortion is wrong because you are taking away someones life and maybe that person could become sucssesful. also it's bad because you are acctually mrdering someone plus i dont think anyone in this life wants to get murderd but it's okay for the baby in ur stomach to ? i dont think that is right.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Ladies Motherhood starts at conception, it is your job to protect that precious baby growing inside you. Be strong when society treats you different, be strong when the man decides to leave, be strong when everyone else tells you to have the abortion. Listen to your conscience stand up and become the mother God intended you to be. Ladies, chose LIFE.

Side: against abortion
Abbott(162) Disputed
1 point

Jaw,

first on behalf of the Ladies, i would like to thank you. you should delete all of your other arguments because this one is the one that makes me think hmmm maybe he's not an ass hole. but anyways.

Ladies Motherhood starts at conception, it is your job to protect that precious baby growing inside you.

What if i don't want my job? it sounds harsh but just think if im willing to have an abortion for WHATEVR reason i obvoiusly dont think it to be that precious now do it?

Be strong when society treats you different

i do belive that society will treat me like im a frigin hero since ya know i didn't get an abortion (i know that that is not the case because nobody cares if i have an abortion. they say they do but nobody would ever know it was me that got one)

be strong when the man decides to leave

Fuck him im a strong independent black woman that dont need no man! haha jk (i mean i am but yeah)

Side: for abortion
2 points
Side: against abortion
2 points

The biggest argument for most Pro-Choice supporters is that "Who are we to tell women what they can and cannot do with their bodies". Which for arguments sake is a very good point. However most Pro-Choice supporters, myself included, being against abortion is not about taking away a woman's right. It is about the fact that while people are here fighting for the right of women and their body they are forgetting about a child and their right to their body. I am against abortion, not because of religion but because I believe that every life has value. The majority of abortions are the result of drunken mistakes. People in my generation (I'm 18) are having sex and getting pregnant younger and younger. There are kids at 15 having kids! Many in which who are too young to live on their own are now bringing in new life and instead of either giving the child to families who can't have their own or buckle down and accept their responsibility they kill the child off. they take what could have been a person and kill it before the ultrasound can show a face (that way they can still sleep at night!) I mean I love meat but i don't want to see the face of the cow I'm chomping into and the same rule applies to abortion. People only have the Third trimester law because they don't want to see the face of the child they're killing. Which should tell us that abortion is wrong. It is a way to get rid of the unwanted.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Since abortion was legalized, 55 million unborn babies have been murdered. These children had no chance of life whatsoever.

Side: against abortion
2 points

I'm sick of people saying that its their body and their choice. It was their choice to have sex and have the possibility to get pregnant. Abortion is wrong because you are not giving that baby a chance to live life. You are harming another human being.

Side: against abortion
Elvira(3446) Disputed
1 point

Rape? Contraception failure?

People don't link sex with having chlidren that much anymore.

And an embryo isn't a human, yet, it's just a cluster of cells.

Side: for abortion
1 point

What if it wasn't their choice to have sex, it is not considered a human being till it is born. It is called a fetice, I do think that most women do use it as birth control and we do need to make better laws. But never judge a women for getting a abortion it was obviously there choice and you don't know their story.

Side: for abortion
2 points

http://www.youtube.com/user/cslewisweb

The Magician's Twin: C.S. Lewis and the Case against Scientism

Gnaw on this a while.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Why do you feel the need to kill children. There are thousands of couples who can not get a baby but want one. And for you to not only deny them a child but to kill it out of hate is wrong. Using words like fetus doesn't justify what you want to do. Why does only a mother have a choice? Why can't a the baby decide weather he/she wants to live or die.

Some of you may be saying, "well a baby can't decide." And you would be right. But we shouldn't have the power to decide who lives and who dies. That child could become the next pope, president, or other important figure. That child could also very well be a drug dealer, user, or criminal. Your not even giving the baby a chance to experience or choose there life, and for what so the mother can feel good knowing that her child is dead. I think abortion is morally and lawfully wrong.

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
2 points

There are thousands of couples who can not get a baby but want one.

And there are already thousands if not millions of children already up for adoption and yet no one wants them.

Side: for abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
1 point

And they go into foster homes until they are old enough to take care of themselves thus never being denied the right of life!

Side: against abortion
ThinkerMan(4) Disputed
1 point

And that is a terrible thing but that doesn't give people the right to kill children. We also have orphanages that take care of the children so I see no need to kill innocent children.

Side: against abortion
2 points

It's obvious which opinion is the winning one here and if a vote were to take place the argument against abortion would be put into law! It's evidential just by looking at the chart information on this debate... Clearly the side for against abortion has nearly 40 more arguments thus the point race on our side is made up of 40 less bias votes. The charts clearly demonstrate that the side for abortion is lacking in arguments most likely because they have been disputed and there's nothing left to say so the only way they can keep it a tight debate is continual bias up voting on less arguments that they have given up defending. I say we won and we're right by majority... Sucks to be you abortionists!

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
1 point

How is abortion the unlawful killing of another human when it's a fetus and perfectly legal?

Side: for abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
1 point

It isn't unlawful based on the judgment of politicians who seek power and re-elections but if subjected to a populous vote from the country... It wouldn't even come close to passing... It's a joke to even think about!

Side: against abortion

No matter the circumstanses, abortion is a tradgic circumstance. While that does not necessarily mean is should be outlawed, it definately should not be encouraged.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Abraham Lincoln’s Thanksgiving Proclamation

Amy PayneNovember 22, 2012 at 8:14 am(0)

Happy Thanksgiving from The Heritage Foundation! As we celebrate and give thanks today, we invite you to read President Abraham Lincoln’s 1863 Thanksgiving Proclamation below.

The year that is drawing toward its close has been filled with the blessings of fruitful fields and healthful skies. To these bounties, which are so constantly enjoyed that we are prone to forget the source from which they come, others have been added which are of so extraordinary a nature that they can not fail to penetrate and soften even the heart which is habitually insensible to the ever-watchful providence of Almighty God.

In the midst of a civil war of unequaled magnitude and severity, which has sometimes seemed to foreign states to invite and to provoke their aggression, peace has been preserved with all nations, order has been maintained, the laws have been respected and obeyed, and harmony has prevailed everywhere, except in the theater of military conflict, while that theater has been greatly contracted by the advancing armies and navies of the Union.

Needful diversions of wealth and of strength from the fields of peaceful industry to the national defense have not arrested the plow, the shuttle, or the ship; the ax has enlarged the borders of our settlements, and the mines, as well as the iron and coal as of our precious metals, have yielded even more abundantly than heretofore. Population has steadily increased notwithstanding the waste that has been made in the camp, the siege, and the battlefield, and the country, rejoicing in the consciousness of augmented strength and vigor, is permitted to expect continuance of years with large increase of freedom.

No human counsel hath devised nor hath any mortal hand worked out these great things. They are the gracious gifts of the Most High God, who, while dealing with us in anger for our sins, hath nevertheless remembered mercy.

It has seemed to me fit and proper that they should be solemnly, reverently, and gratefully acknowledged, as with one heart and one voice, by the whole American people. I do therefore invite my fellow-citizens in every part of the United States, and also those who are in foreign lands, to set apart and observe the last Thursday of November next as a day of thanksgiving and praise to our beneficent Father who dwelleth in the heavens.

And I recommend to them that while offering up the ascriptions justly due to Him for such singular deliverances and blessings they do also, with humble penitence for our national perverseness and disobedience, commend to His tender care all those who have become widows, orphans, mourners, or sufferers in the lamentable civil strife in which we are unavoidably engaged, and fervently implore the imposition of the Almighty hand to heal the wounds of the nation and to restore it, as soon as may be consistent with the divine purpose, to the full enjoyment of peace, harmony, tranquility, and union.

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
1 point

Spamming random junk for more votes for your side now?

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

I chose to post the truth about Thanksgiving on Thanksgiving Day, something every U. S. citizen, or illegal alien among us, NEEDS to know!

Side: against abortion
2 points

The Washington Times

Forgetting the holy; The Feast of the Intransitive Verb

Published Thursday, November 25, 1999.

By Kevin "Seamus" Hasson

Every fourth Thursday in November work and school are canceled so that families can gather together for the day and thank - well, we'll get to just who it is they may be thanking in a minute. They also enjoy good food, good company and good football. The holiday is currently called Thanksgiving, although there is reason to think that may have to change.

Just about every other religious holiday has been stripped of its original meaning and transformed into a more secular version of its former self. Why should Thanksgiving be any different? In Pittsburgh, Christmas and Hanukkah morphed into "Sparkle Season" and then disintegrated further into "Downtown Pittsburgh Sparkles." Public school systems across the country are renaming the Easter Bunny the "Special Bunny." Even Halloween is being transformed out of concern for its rampant religiosity. In many places it is now the "Fall Festival Celebration." Surely Thanksgiving, a state-sanctioned holiday that purports to give the nation a day to thank God, cannot withstand the small, furious army of radical secularists determined to take the "holy" out of our holidays. A day set aside to thank God can hardly be appropriate when the celebration of Christmas, Hanukkah and even Halloween has become taboo. Something will have to be done.

So I have a modest proposal: Let's practice truth-in-labeling and call the November holiday that was formerly Thanksgiving, "The Feast of the Intransitive Verb." Intransitive verbs, as we all remember from those unpleasant days of diagramming sentences in grammar school, are verbs that do not require an object. Verbs in sentences like "The horse ran" and "The wind blows" are intransitive because the horse doesn't have to run anything or the wind blow anything. They can simply run and blow without any object at all. Well, what about the verb "to thank"? It's supposed to have an object. You can't just sit there and "thank." You have to thank someone. Which is why secularists don't use that word much in late November anymore. Their creed requires them to celebrate the day by being grateful while thanking no one. And it's embarrassing to have to choose between being politically and grammatically correct. So secularists prefer the circumlocution "to give thanks." It doesn't require an object. You can get away with "giving thanks" without having to be grateful to anyone in particular. It's much more comfortable that way. Thank whomever you want. Or, don't thank anyone; it's entirely up to you. Either way you can still "give thanks." That's the beauty of using an intransitive verb; it doesn't need any object.

Of course, once the object of our gratitude is out of the way it's all downhill. The rest of the day is uncommonly easy to secularize. It has none of the outward trappings of a religious holiday. There are no babes in mangers or symbolic candles to remove from courthouse steps. No one is ringing church bells that require silencing or allowing children to hunt for eggs that must be renamed. The staples of Thanksgiving - turkeys, cornucopias and pumpkin pies - in and of themselves present no real threat to the secularist ascendancy. And the football games are an absolute godsend (so to speak) for secularists. After all, the more distracted we all are the easier it is to forget about the one to whom we owe gratitude.

So let's hear it for the Feast of the Intransitive Verb. It's a worthy companion to "Sparkle Season" (formerly known as Christmas), "Special Person Day" (previously St. Valentine's Day), and the "Spring Festival," which was once Easter. Of course, if all this isn't agreeable to you, if it all seems just a little bit extreme, or even if you're just worried that turkey and cranberries may never taste the same again, you could always

be a thumb in the eye of the radical secularists. You could insist on thanking God, and not settle for

generically "giving thanks." You could tell your neighbors that you're grateful to God for all He's done for

you. You could even go so far as to tell your children to do the same - to make sure that amidst all the

construction paper turkeys they fashion in school they get the message across that they, too, are thanking

God.

Defending the public integrity of our holidays is not just petulance. Cultures are built, and eroded, by a

succession of public acts both great and small. Everything from the arts we exhibit to the table manners we

display makes a difference in building up or wearing down our culture. Public holiday celebrations are

particularly potent engines of culture - which is why the secularists have poured so much energy into

changing ours. Pittsburgh's "sparkle season," for example, has done great damage, not only to Christmas in

Pennsylvania, but to our culture nationally. But the fight is far from over. So this weekend enlist in the

culture war and thank God.

Kevin J. “Seamus” Hasson is the president emeritus of the Becket Fund for Religious Liberty.

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
1 point

Spamming random junk for more votes for your side now?

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
2 points

Everything I post here is quite relevant to this debate, roc.

Side: against abortion
2 points

‎"Now therefore I do recommend and assign Thursday the 26th day of November next to be devoted by the People of these States to the service of that great and glorious Being, who is the beneficent Author of all the good that was, that is, or that will be - That we may then all unite in rendering unto him our sincere and humble thanks - for his kind care and protection of the People of this Country previous to their becoming a Nation - for the signal and manifold mercies, and the favorable interpositions of his Providence which we experienced in the course and conclusion of the late war - for the great degree of tranquility, union, and plenty, which we have since enjoyed - for the peaceable and rational manner, in which we have been enabled to establish constitutions of government for our safety and happiness, and particularly the national One now lately instituted - for the civil and religious liberty with which we are blessed; and the means we have of acquiring and diffusing useful knowledge; and in general for all the great and various favors which he hath been pleased to confer upon us."

--George Washington, 1789

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
1 point

Spamming random junk for more votes for your side now?

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

I was informing folks of the truth about Thanksgiving and George Washington, that's what. It's quite pertinent to this debate.

Side: against abortion
2 points

Think about the mother, she gave life to her child. As well as HER mother gave life. Imagine that decided to abort her daughter (That would one day be the daughter that would have THE child). Then, there would be no life. You need to go through the hardships.

"There is absolutely no way to justify that horrific 'procedure' that then cuts the back of the head that was partially delivered and the brains were scrambled using stainless steel instruments, and evacuated with a suction. This is clearly murder. This is clearly unlike the usual practice of medicine."

http://dutyisours.com/abortion.htm

Side: against abortion
1 point

The abortion industry in America is nothing but a tool to keep the black population in check.

The founder of Planned Parenthood,Margaret Sanger,was a white supremacist who advocated the forced sterilization of blacks,jews,and the handicapped.Planned Parenthood targets black women for abortions. If you are into racial genocide,then Planned Parenthood and the abortion industry are just your cup of tea.

Side: against abortion

how can u be for abortion. that is taking away rights from a child who isnt even born yet. they are living inside of you! that is the cruelest thing u could ever do to a child. its not their mistake that your pregnant, its yours. so if u dont want the baby, dont kill it, put the poor thing up for adoption cuz if u even consider putting a baby up for abortion, you dont even deserve to have them. how could you do that to someone. they have as much right to live as you do.

Side: against abortion

how can u be for abortion. that is taking away rights from a child who isnt even born yet. they are living inside of you! that is the cruelest thing u could ever do to a child. its not their mistake that your pregnant, its yours. so if u dont want the baby, dont kill it, put the poor thing up for adoption cuz if u even consider putting a baby up for abortion, you dont even deserve to have them. how could you do that to someone. they have as much right to live as you do.

Side: against abortion
Vault(6) Disputed
3 points

So if someone's raped, they should be forced to endure 9 months of pain and emotional trauma because of a situation they had no control over? That's ridiculous, and harmful. It's incredibly selfish to insinuate someone should have to endure near a year's worth of pain and suffering because of someone else's mistake.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
2 points

An abortion always causes psychological trauma to the one who has been an accomplice to her own baby's death. It causes physical trauma to both she and her baby, and sometimes infections to the mother, or even death to the mother. Most importantly, it ends the life of the unborn child. That's real suffering. Suffering that endures long after the "procedure" has accomplished its hideous purpose.

Side: against abortion
JasonLing(10) Disputed
2 points

Which is longer? To endure the 9 month of pain and emotional trauma due to pregnancy or to regret and suffer emotionally and mentally for her whole life because of abortion..?

Think..!

Side: against abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
2 points

Any female finding herself in a situation as difficult as this is already suffering beyond imagination. To add murder on top of that suffering would make it unbearable! Murder of her unborn child does not alleviate the suffering of the rape perpetrated upon her. To bring a precious child, created in God's image, into the world after such an act is shedding light in the darkness! Life conquers death!

Side: against abortion

only god has the right to end the life of a unborn chilren

Side: against abortion
2 points

It is God who gives and God who takes away. Thank you RD!

Side: against abortion
Berrystar(159) Disputed
1 point

LOL You're in love with a 5 year old idiot? OMG!!! PERVERT!!!!

Side: for abortion
1 point

You know I've investigated this entire debate and some responses I've disputed and a lot I feel are just too overwhelming to reply everyone. Basically this is my finalization... Everyone who is pro-choice will go to any length to justify abortion (without the exception of rape and life threatening birth situations) as a means to escape responsibility. That's it! People don't want to deal with consequences so they'll justify killing a live fetus for any reason pertaining to it to avoid responsibility. You know what I have to say to those people?... You are cowards!!! And don't think for one minute that because among our society you can get away with it you won't pay for it later. You're just postponing your judgment! Sucks to be you!

Side: against abortion
1 point

Answer me this... If abortion is sooo right, then why is it always a traumatic experience? Huh? When peoples god given or nature rights are under tyranny they don't rationalize the validity of their rights like abortionists do, they simply fight for them... Abortionists want to argue for their right to abort the life of others they would never engage in war for the right to exercise abortion!

Side: against abortion
1 point

If abortion is so right as a means of a woman has the right to choose what to do with her body then tell me why is it illegal for anyone to self induce harm to themselves and why is it illegal for a woman to self induce an abortion when ultimately it's the same result as a surgical abortion... Double edge sword if you ask me! It's only being permitted because people want to avoid consequences and responsibility... Furthermore the people that are supporting it is our democratic representatives and they are only promoting it to get re-elected to their office. Have you heard of any political figure that holds office that has had an abortion? No! And you know why... Because they know that if they let the scum of the country get their way they gain more power without abandoning their own values. It's the same damn thing for gay rights, government assist programs and drug legalization.

Side: against abortion
1 point

True it is a woman's choice! Everybody has there free agency to do whatever they want but afterwards if a woman decides to get an abortion she should be tried based on if it was necessary or not and if not then it should be considered murder! Plain and simple. Can you imagine a woman standing in from of a jury explaining her position on why she got an abortion because it was her choice and there is no other reason behind it. They would laugh because the truth or real reason behind it would be because she was irresponsible and she didn't want to deal with consequences!... I find the defendant, GUILTY as charges of MURDER!

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
1 point

They would laugh because the truth or real reason behind it would be because she was irresponsible and she didn't want to deal with consequences!... I find the defendant, GUILTY as charges of MURDER!

Good thing you would never be on a jury with that that biased of an opinion.

Side: for abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
1 point

Good thing for you, you have corrupt politicians and judges on your side that support your biased and immoral opinion!

Side: against abortion
1 point

Plain and simple Abortion is Murder! It is against humanity, God and everything this country used to hold dear, like the right to life!

Side: against abortion
1 point

I am pro life. If you are too much of a slut to keep your legs closed then you should face the consequences

Side: against abortion
1 point

"It's nice that everyone in the media grants that Princess Kate is carrying a baby, not a piece of tissue." ~John Stonestreet of http://www.breakpoint.org/bp-home

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
1 point

Thats because kate wants the baby and wasn't raped.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

How predictable your answer is, roc. Rape covers 2% of all pregnancies. Yes, you anti-Christs all say that if a woman is pleased to be pregnant, it's called a baby. If she is not pleased to be pregnant, you conveniently refer to it as a blob of tissue. How ironic.

Side: against abortion
1 point

Abortion is wrong all the way around. You go to jail if you murder someone that is already born so why is it okay to kill an unborn living child, because life begins at conception.

Side: against abortion
1 point

i think people should not do abortion as a result of that will be killing your own child i wont say i am completely on this side what i mean is sometime women have to do things they are not willing to or maybe they just don't want a child. so i think both are right in their own ways

Side: against abortion
1 point

abortion is a huge mistake.

a mother who did abortion is so stupid. they DON'T have a heart. babies who are developing inside her mom's womb are innocent.

there's nothing wrong if you're pregnant right?

i've heard many women in the world did abortion. it's so sad to hear. if you see pregnant mom delivering her child, she would be very happy and some cries of happy tears.

why don't you appreciate God for the gift He gave you?

if you don't want to have a child yet, why should you have sex?

and when you know you got pregnant, you're so upset and abort them?

Side: against abortion
1 point

I am against abortion, but I agree on abortion on certain cases.

In my opinion, abortion should be allowed given that the woman would find it almost impossible to give the child proper care. Example, if it being born means it will only suffer of malnourishment and poverty for the family.

Otherwise, it shouldn't be. It will just be murder. The baby has the right to live, and it should not be thrown away just because the parents don't want it, even though they can provide for it.

Abortion should only be allowed only if the baby will only suffer when it is born.

Actually, abortion should not be allowed at all case. If the parents don't want the kid, give birth to it then send it to a foster care institution. This is one of the things that the government should put money to. But then again, I understand that not all governments can afford this (hence abortion should be allowed on some cases)... but if the government can afford to build military vehicles that cost millions, if not billions, they should be able to provide for this!

Side: against abortion
1 point

Abortion is cruel on so many levels.

First of you were the stupid bitch that decide to get pregnant so know you have to live with what you have done, I mean if you were raped that is a different story you might as well give it up for adoption but regardless killing a baby before he/she is born is cruel. You never know your kid could have been the next black president, or maybe even the first person to discover that there are more planets out there you never know. Your kid could have accomplished so many things in life and you would have never known. So yes I think that Abortion is wrong.

Side: against abortion
1 point

As Steven Levitt proved in his book "Freakonomics," abortion can increase crime rates. Unwanted children born into financially or socially incapable families are more likely to become miscreants in the future. Mothers should have the liberty to do anything with their child. Not having abortion in suitable cases may actually be detrimental to mothers' health. Although abortion can be considered as "murder", these children have potential to kill even more people in the future.

Side: against abortion
1 point

if a woman that was prego and she got murdered than why is it considered a double homicide

Side: against abortion
1 point

Lord I could talk about this all day. Ok first of all, lets discuss the women who willingly go out and have sex KNOWING that there is ALWAYS the risk of getting pregnant, because condoms break and all this other crap...and then has the nerve to kill the baby when she gets pregnant. That angers me to no end. It was your decision to have premarital sex, therefore, the consequence is a child, who very well could have a future as an outstanding contribution to society, so, its your responsibility to deal with the consequences. And even if you don't want the child, which is still heartbreaking to me, but still, I would much rather you give the baby up for adoption to at LEAST give it a chance at a good life, but why kill it? Because its the easy way out?? IT WAS YOUR MISTAKE TO HAVE SEX NOW YOU HAVE TO DEAL WITH THE CONSEQUENCES SO SUCK IT UP AND RAISE THE CHILD. Now onto the "touchy subjects" such as rape victims and incest victims...Now these special cases are only ONE PERCENT of all abortion cases and I really don't think that justifies abortion. It really doesn't.

Side: against abortion
1 point

I have always believed that Abortion was wrong ... For the pro choice people or for abortion people ... Keep in mind that there are women in China that are forced to have an abortion doesn't matter how far along you are..... That's wrong in every single way! No one and I mean NO ONE has the right to decide if a life is worth keeping or not ... You want to open your legs and have unprotected sex that's the consequence... There are people who cannot have children and would love the child you don't want to exist.... Your directly killing a life by aborting....that being said there are still circumstances where abortion is necessary ..especially if that fetus or unborn child has an illness that would effect its way of life or if it was going to suffer after being born due to defect... Is it a joy to carry a baby after being raped? No ..but that unborn child had even less choice then you did .. It didn't choose to be made so why take it out on it by killing it ... People need to stop using abortions selfishly ..then it wouldn't be an issue..

Side: against abortion
1 point

Abortion is wrong! If a person is pronounced dead when the heart stops beating why aren't we pronounced alive when it starts? Your mother didn't get rid of you so why do you have the right to get rid of someone? You made the mistake of having an intercourse you need to deal with the consequences! If someone raped you then you can always give that child up for adoption. The only time abortion should be okay is when the child could have a disability or when it could kill the mother, the child, or both!

Side: against abortion
1 point

If the fact that the fetus is not yet a child is not enough of an argument to save it why is it enough to justify killing it?

Side: against abortion
1 point

So my first point would be is there really a difference between murder and abortion? No not really. If you kill a little girl while she is living in her mothers belly, its okay. NO ITS NOT! If you didn't want to deal with a kid or couldn't afford it, then you shouldn't have got knocked up. That may sound rude but its the truth. And if this were to happen, give her up for adoption, let her have a chance at life. Basically if you agree with abortion you are saying that its okay to kill someone, but only in certain places. So i can kill this little girl while she is in her mothers belly, but not in her bedroom. So i can kill a person in the park, but not at the store. All you are saying is that the place of murder is the only factor.

Also you as a human should not have the power to decide weather a person lives or dies. You should not be able to choose if a girl gets to have a chance at life or if she isn't worth it.

Side: against abortion
1 point

So my first point would be is there really a difference between murder and abortion? No not really.

Murder is done against a living human being, abortion is done against a fetus/zygote. That is a difference.

If you kill a little girl while she is living in her mothers belly, its okay. NO ITS NOT! If you didn't want to deal with a kid or couldn't afford it, then you shouldn't have got knocked up.

I would think you would have heard why that statement is out of touch by now. Most people don't intend to get pregnant then get an abortion when they can't afford it or deal with it.

And if this were to happen, give her up for adoption, let her have a chance at life.

After giving up 9 months, her health, and her occupational prospects much of the time. That is incredibly easy to say, but quite honestly still life ruining for many women.

Basically if you agree with abortion you are saying that its okay to kill someone, but only in certain places

No, you are (almost always) saying you don't believe that said fetus/zygote is a living human. You should try to understand differing opinions before making such statements.

All you are saying is that the place of murder is the only factor.

No, you are saying the state of life is the factor.

Also you as a human should not have the power to decide weather a person lives or dies

Again, whether or not said being is a "person" is the question at the bottom of the abortion debate.

Side: for abortion
1 point

Abortion is should not be allowed because it is basically murder. Killing an unborn child is about as bad as killing your own mother but worse because your mother can defend yourself for the time being. It can also cause inability to have children ever again if not done properly.

no matter how much you try the pending thought of almost becoming a mother shall forever be at the tip of your mind. That thought will also come with guilt. and a lot of it.

Side: against abortion
1 point

Abortion is certainly always extremely sad. But philosophical arguments aside, embryos depend upon the mother for life. They are, if you will (and I'll be slated for this) parasites, in the medical sense. It is up to the woman whatever she does with or to her body, and it is an unfortunate fact that regardless of the nature of conception, the lady gets to decide what happens to her body and anything in it. I am for abortion.

Side: against abortion
1 point

I'm against abortion to an extent. Many argue that it's the woman's body and about how she feels. But what about what the Father wants? Is it fair to cut of a possible life, even though someone is willing to take care of the child, provide and love it? Is it fair that because it's physically impossible for the Father to have the baby that he has no rights about what happens to it? There are many single woman nowadays for the simple fact is they can have children. If men were able to have kids than I'm sure there would be an equal amount of single dads and mums.

However, in certain circumstances I understand. Such as, if the Mother's health is at risk and she has no support from the Father or family or if someone has been raped. But even then 26weeks is a bit late to make the decision if you want your baby or not, many babies have been born and survived at this age, so it's unfair to end it's life. Therefore, I think the abortion cut-off date should be lowered.

Side: against abortion

Abortion is a cruel thing that should not be taken like its a woman's choice. They need to man up to the consequence if they get pregnant. This is absurd the foolishness of people taking an innocent little life that God had a plan for.

Side: against abortion
1 point

We are all human beings and we have all lived our lives thinking that murder is wrong and we should not kill unless someone is endangering our lives. Then why are we killing a human that is already inside of us, why is this not considered murder. It is not going to kill us, we owe a duty to these people already inside of us. We should not kill someone that is already alive.

Side: against abortion

I would forever stay with my opinion that abortion is wrong. No one has the right to stop a child from coming into this world and experiencing it like we did. Not even its mother! It is basically the same as murdering another human being. Along with that, the mother could die or never give birth again, if it's not done properly which I would think would be the right punishment for that mother. Sorry to sound so judging.

Side: against abortion
0 points

Can we realistically hold this misguided fourteen year old child responsible for her pathetic act when our culture does not afford dignity to human life? How convoluted is this thinking? Our illustrious president adamantly opposes protection for an aborted baby who survives the attempt to end her/his life. He has no problem with the defenseless infant lying there alone, on a blue pad, struggling for every breath. Why is this fourteen year old girl's baby's life deemed more significant than those defenseless babies allowed to suffer to death, unattended? Cassidy's baby was unwanted too. At what precise moment did her baby's life become valuable? How is it legally permissible, in 2012 in the United States of America, for females to have the precious little lives developing inside of them to be diabolically ripped from their nurturing, safe havens. Casey Anthony, remember her, desired an abortion when she was pregnant with Caylee, but her mother, Cindy Anthony, would not allow it. That action would have been accepted by our murderous society. However, when Casey killed Caylee at age two, she was locked up. At what precise moment did Caylee's worthless life suddenly become valuable? At what point was it suddenly not OK to consider killing her anymore? This fourteen year old Florida teen, Cassidy, is a mere child. The frontal lobe of her brain has not yet finished developing. All children make bad decisions, don't they? Did her parents have the right to be informed of the life growing within their daughter's womb? Aren't they responsible to help her formulate right beliefs and correct thinking. That's what conservatives believe. Progressives differ by saying conservatives have no right to indoctrinate their offspring into their narrow way of thinking. Wait a minute, how can they deny them this when, while also saying, everyone needs to be accepted for what they deem right for themselves. According to our present culture that says everything is relative, how could she or her parents be held accountable for her act? I have no doubt many all-wise progressives have said as much though. Again, convoluted thinking much? In my view, it does sound as if Cassidy's parents need to be held accountable for blatant neglect of their child. After all, she is a small girl and her baby boy weighed over nine pounds. How could they miss her bump? According to our postmodern culture, it was their right to neglect her, so we must tolerate it. In a similar situation, it might not be what we deem right for us. We need to accept that what is right for us may not be right for someone else, and that's just the way it has become in our common-sense-is-not-common-anymore society. In a society that says there is no truth, no right and wrong, how could Cassidy be charged with the first degree murder of her newborn baby? As much as tolerance is touted from the rooftops across our nation, aren't we expected to tolerate her decision? In a sense, Cassidy simply took the scissors from an abortionist's hands to use them herself.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2210159/Florida-teen-14-charged-degree-murder-strangles-newborn-baby-hides-body-shoe-box-dumps-laundry.html?ICO=most_read_module

Side: against abortion
Akulakhan(2960) Disputed Banned
4 points

OH BY THE WAY thanks for that copy/paste spam.

-

Can we realistically hold this misguided fourteen year old child responsible for her pathetic act when our culture does not afford dignity to human life?

EXCUSE ME? SHE KILLED A LIVING BREATHING HUMAN BEING. The fucker even made sure the baby was alive and conscious before strangling it! THAT is fucked up. You intend to pardon her yet play the whole "abortion is murder!" card? Not going to happen.

-

Our illustrious president adamantly opposes protection for an aborted baby who survives the attempt to end her/his life. He has no problem with the defenseless infant lying there alone, on a blue pad, struggling for every breath.

This is both unrelated and not backed up. Please try again. Nice play on imagery to try an invoke an image of something completely unfounded. Are you trying to suggest Obama goes to the local abortion clinic and just looks apathetically at dead babies? AND I THOUGHT I WAS AN ABSURDIST.

-

Why is this fourteen year old girl's baby's life deemed more significant than those defenseless babies allowed to suffer to death, unattended? Cassidy's baby was unwanted too. At what precise moment did her baby's life become valuable?

Because that baby is just that, a baby. A living helpless compositionally independent cognitive cradle of human. Her ability to detach from her child is a psychological abnormality that is related to the psychosis of killers of any other sort. It is a complete removal of the ability to have affectionate bonding. They are in likeness. The baby's life should have become valuable to the mother at some point. Because it didn't, she killed it. We experience grief and anger out of our own understanding, and of internalization of the lack of affectionate bonding. She is not fit to be a mother, and should have had an abortion and saved the child the ability to cognitively process the pain and death. That would have been more humane.

-

How is it legally permissible, in 2012 in the United States of America, for females to have the precious little lives developing inside of them to be diabolically ripped from their nurturing, safe havens.

Another visual to circumnavigate the reality of the situation, that a fetus is not living, cannot feel "safe", nor is able to oppose or favor any situation? How cute.

-

Casey Anthony, remember her, desired an abortion when she was pregnant with Caylee, but her mother, Cindy Anthony, would not allow it. That action would have been accepted by our murderous society. However, when Casey killed Caylee at age two, she was locked up. At what precise moment did Caylee's worthless life suddenly become valuable? At what point was it suddenly not OK to consider killing her anymore?

Same shit different sentences, miss. And again MAYBE CASEY ANTHONY SHOULD'VE HAD AN ABORTION AND SPARED CAYLEE FROM A CONSCIOUS DEATH. Your fear of death is tribute to being aware of what it is to live.

-

This fourteen year old Florida teen, Cassidy, is a mere child. The frontal lobe of her brain has not yet finished developing. All children make bad decisions, don't they?

Fourteen year olds don't go around suffocating babies last I checked. And those that do, or do so to animals or harm people, are fucked up and grow up to be the people we know as mass serial psychopathic killers. Thanks for sympathizing with a real baby killer.

-

Did her parents have the right to be informed of the life growing within their daughter's womb? Aren't they responsible to help her formulate right beliefs and correct thinking. That's what conservatives believe.

Irrelevant, unless you thought it wrong that they denied her an abortion. In that case, you are on the wrong side of the debate and must attribute everything you've posted prior and after as a lie.

-

Progressives differ by saying conservatives have no right to indoctrinate their offspring into their narrow way of thinking. Wait a minute, how can they deny them this when, while also saying, everyone needs to be accepted for what they deem right for themselves. According to our present culture that says everything is relative, how could she or her parents be held accountable for her act? I have no doubt many all-wise progressives have said as much though. Again, convoluted thinking much?

This is becoming political why? Oh yeah because this is a pasted rant you had on your website. Again it dilutes your argument with distractions, and again pries on predesignated beliefs to be favored by the party of your choice about this subject. And I'll have you know, Liberal or Conservative, no two people parent the same. You are stereotyping. Your general misunderstanding of the concept of relativism is astonishing. Relatively her mother should have seen her as unstable and acted upon it unless relatively to a third party, their both batshit, which seems to be the case.

-

In my view, it does sound as if Cassidy's parents need to be held accountable for blatant neglect of their child. After all, she is a small girl and her baby boy weighed over nine pounds. How could they miss her bump?

Let's give you that they're dreadful parents; because they are. Does that forgive Cassidey's actions? No. She is the one whom killed the child.

-

According to our postmodern culture, it was their right to neglect her, so we must tolerate it. In a similar situation, it might not be what we deem right for us.

This statement is very filler and bullshit. your views on society have nothing to do with this. If society is telling these parents how to act, they're not good parents, regardless of what -society says.

-

We need to accept that what is right for us may not be right for someone else, and that's just the way it has become in our common-sense-is-not-common-anymore society.

Like abortion?

-

In a society that says there is no truth, no right and wrong, how could Cassidy be charged with the first degree murder of her newborn baby?

Again no one is saying there is no right or wrong. Relativity isn't the disregard for right and wrong, that's Nihilism. She murdered the fucking baby, she deserves to be charged.

-

As much as tolerance is touted from the rooftops across our nation, aren't we expected to tolerate her decision? In a sense, Cassidy simply took the scissors from an abortionist's hands to use them herself.

OH MY LANTA we have been over this already. If an abortion is merely murder, than let's just murder all the kids and get this damn argument out of existence! Hope you can take a joke,

-

Love, Akulakhan.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
2 points

If I want to copy and paste my own essay that addresses the topic of abortion here, I will! Who are you to tell me my argument is invalid? You are barely out of diapers, with an under-developed frontal lobe at that! There's a greater chance I'll listen to you after you turn 25, as well as after you have endured great suffering.

Side: against abortion
1 point

A child of fourteen knows right from wrong and should be tried as that... Your telling me if a fourteen year old held a gun to my head and pulled the trigger that they shouldn't be held accountable?? That's BS ... If you know you could end a life and do it anyway your guilty!

Side: for abortion
TheAshman(2299) Disputed
4 points

I'm sorry but anyone who uses the Daily Mail to support their argument needs disputing, i'll give you the benefit of the doubt as you obviously are not British but in the UK the Daily Mail is famous for being a right wing reactionary, bigoted "newspaper" better suited for scaremongering rather than reporting proper news. If you want your arguments to be taken seriously it would be best to use another source as the Mail is less than unreliable.

Side: for abortion
1 point

Would you feel comfortable comparing the Daily Mail to Fox News in the US?

Fox News in the US is casually known as the most right wing lunatic news channel. Strongly republican/conservative. Hate opposing opinions. "He's a LIBERAL!" seems to be a favorite phrase among these types.

Side: for abortion

I feel like if you are not prepared for a child, then you should take the necessary precautions beforehand, such as using protection such as condoms, or birth control (which is not a guarantee that you will not get pregnant by using this solely on its own.) Or abstain from sex altogether. I don't feel much sympathy for those who end up getting pregnant when they weren't careful, and then they want an abortion because they are not 'prepared' for a baby. But it is a consequence that they need to deal with I think. They should 'grow up' and take responsibility for their actions and do what it takes to raise the child they brought in to the world, even if it wasn't supposed to happen. The child should become the priority. However, in some cases I understand abortion, for instance if a woman is raped. I feel she has the right to go through with an abortion, or if severe risk factors are involved.

Side: against abortion
9 points

Women should have the ability to choose what they do with their bodies. The government should not be allowed to force women to continue a pregnancy against their will.

Would I care if I were aborted? I wouldn't care at all. Because if I was aborted, I wouldn't be able to think to myself "damn it mom and dad, why did you abort me?" because I wouldn't exist to think that thought in the first place.

Similarly, these "unborn babies" also do not care, because they do not have the capacity to think these thoughts since they no longer exist.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
3 points

Thank God all the precious, vulnerable, defenseless babies who are diabolically murdered in abortion mills go straight to the arms of Jesus! They will never know the sin, pain, evil and suffering of this fallen world, and they will never have the opportunity to reject sweet Jesus!

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
5 points

Seeing as how there isn't any evidence for god's existence, I'm going to have to say that you're wrong.

It is more likely that they cease to exist, even though they never had any meaningful amount of sentience anyways.

Side: for abortion
MrPrime(268) Disputed
4 points

GinKirk, for the sake of argument, what makes a 1 week old fetus presious?

Side: for abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
3 points

Oh but I bet as a fully developed human now, there are things you wish you could go back in time and change for the better earlier in your life right? Things you were not conscious of the consequences at the time huh? And if that became possible I bet you would leap at it. It's not right to have an abortion under the circumstances of avoiding responsibility or consequences from irresponsible actions when that life from day one has the potential to be something great 50yrs down the road!

Side: against abortion
KitKat101(32) Disputed
3 points

Are you saying that if I were to murder someone right now that it would be ok? They wouldn't be able to care because they are dead...

Side: against abortion
Cuaroc(8303) Disputed
3 points

How is removing a parasite from a person the unlawful killing of another person when its perfectly legal?

Side: for abortion
vcuriel1(2) Disputed
3 points

so it is then also unjustifiable for the government to tell you not to murder a person?

Side: against abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
2 points

The government says it's o k to kill the babies, why then using that logic is it wrong to kill other people? See they're either both right or both are wrong, you can't pick and choose with one is murder and which one is not.

Side: for abortion
namenotgary(74) Disputed
2 points

You are killing the potential for a living being, who would have created many more living beings,so you would essentially be killing millions of future people, it doesn't matter if they can camprehend it or not, that does not determine right or wrong.

Side: against abortion
mommybrock Disputed
1 point

they have nerves and pain sensories explaing why they move accross the womb in discomfort so during the abortion they wuld feel it and know something was wrong because of theyre honest existence :) js

Side: against abortion
5 points

If a woman wants an abortion is really up to her, true...but why did she allow herself to get pregnant in the first place and these so called loving unwedge mothers, have abortions or someone that is seeing a married man, will have an abortion and just so the wife of his, does not find out. Yea, let's destroy a fetus, a live human being why don't we now! Let's make an infant suffer and simply abort it and toss the baby in a near by trash can outside the wonderful hospitals, where doctor's operate on people and save lives daily.

Side: for abortion

Being the fence on this issue for some time, I have decided that as long as a woman has the right of ownership to her own body including the fetus inside her until birth, she has the choice as to do whatever she wishes to do with her own body.

Side: for abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
3 points

But the fetus isn't her body... And people don't have the right to harm there own body without consequences... So how is it right for a woman to destroy a fetus and there be no consequences? By the way it's illegal for a woman to self induce an abortion but ultimately whats the difference between that and an abortion performed by a doctor! That is how contradicting the subject is.

Side: against abortion
4 points

If the fetus is in her body she owns it just like my heart is in my body, I own my heart.

Side: for abortion
4 points

I broke the dead tie! Yaaay! naw but really its all religion based for the pro life argument and therefore should not be taken seriously. Roe V Wade will stand as law.

Side: for abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
3 points

Its based on whats wrong and right, murder my friend lands in the catorgory of wrong. There are plenty of others, none religious who feel the same.

Side: against abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
3 points

AS, you need to educate yourself about the truth of the Roe v Wade story, and how diabolical it is.

Side: against abortion
AveSatanas(4237) Clarified
2 points

True as it may be, the interworkings of the case are irrelevant. The supreme court made a ruling, and regardless of how the case was conducted the law is now the law and it will stand.

Side: against abortion
Abbott(162) Disputed
2 points

from wikipedia not the best source but whatever: a woman's decision to have an abortion, but that right must be balanced against the state's two legitimate interests in regulating abortions: protecting prenatal life and protecting women's health. Arguing that these state interests became stronger over the course of a pregnancy

Thats the right decision! Obviously when the fetus becomes an actual baby and it's like 3 weeks b4 the due date the mother shouldnt be able to kill it off then...but in the beging before it is a baby when it is just a fetus HELL YEAH if i don't want it i give it back to its prevous owner Da LAWD hahaha naw but really

Side: for abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
2 points

Right now there are people trying to decide when life begins. Abortion is destroying life - therefore it has to be murder. As long as the baby remains in the uterus it will be nourished. It will grow and be delivered at term. If you disrupt that in any way, knowingly and intentionally, you are killing a life. Abortion is truly a wicked act, an abomination on mankind.

Side: against abortion
AveSatanas(4237) Disputed
1 point

Scientists declared that in the first month window to get abortions the "life" is just a self replicating cell with no brain, personality, heart beat, ect and therefore it is not killing a life. It's more like squishing an ant then murdering a human.

Side: for abortion
3 points

All arguments against abortion are based on religious views. You have no right to try to force some one else to live by YOUR mythology.

Side: for abortion
Jawkins20(138) Disputed
5 points

I never said I was religious, but if what you say is true, then why do we have any laws like don't rape, steal, assault, murder? I would say they seem to all be based on religion as well, so if you condone abortion, then you wold also condone any of the previous crimes I suggested. So if someone you know was murdered, then why should you be upset since their act was right for them. It's either they are wrong or right, black or white, no grey. Don't tell me murder is wrong then turn around and tell me abortion is right. Contradiction.

Side: against abortion
user554random(1175) Disputed Banned
5 points

but if what you say is true, then why do we have any laws like don't rape, steal, assault, murder?

Seriously? You honestly think it was religion that came up with outlawing rape, theft, assault, and murder? Wow...

These were outlawed because they violated people's rights. These can be perfectly explained from a secular perspective. It is obvious that religion has poisoned your mind. I bet you're of the mindset that religion is responsible for morality too, right?

So if someone you know was murdered, then why should you be upset since their act was right for them

Murdering someone else is a violation of their rights. The accusation that its all because of religion that murder is illegal, is just a public declaration to all that you haven't researched your shit and that you've been well indoctrinated into your religious teachings.

Don't tell me murder is wrong then turn around and tell me abortion is right. Contradiction.

Murder is wrong. Abortion is neutral. It is up to the person to decide. Not you Jawkins. This is not a dictatorship. A fetus is not a person since it lacks all qualities of person hood.

Side: for abortion
ASHenry(7) Disputed
5 points

I actually am Pro-Life and I am not religious. I do not think abortion should be banned based on religious views because we, as Americans, are a melting pot of cultures and religions and we have no right to guide millions of people buy 1 religious veiw.

Side: against abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
3 points

You need to understand that morality does not derive from religion, it derives from nature and its laws! Religion just practices morality!

Side: against abortion
OODaddy(127) Disputed
3 points

POPPYCOCK !!! While I am personally pro-freedom and pro-choice I strongly disagree. One could argue that regardless of religion there is a soul and it begins at conception. I don't agree, but it is a valid argument.

Side: against abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
3 points

I do not live by mythology. Science, the study of God's creation, proves that life begins at conception. Science, God's creation, concurs with God's creation of the human life.

Side: against abortion
norcalkev(31) Disputed
2 points

No they are not... They are based on the judgment of right or wrong which derives from morality which derives from nature's laws. Religion just practices morality it didn't invent it!

Side: against abortion
3 points

Abortion should be legal up to a certain point and then illegal after the matter.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

Abortion stops a beating heart, a heart that starts beating after only 15 days of life!

Side: against abortion
chatturgha(1644) Disputed
4 points

A heart does not determine human life. Consciousness does. If you want to get fancy, 'soul' does.

And a fetus does not develop brainwaves, thus proving it's consciousness, until after four weeks.

Before it has brainwaves, it's reasonable to assume that it does not have a soul and is therefore not yet truly human.

Thus, abortion is not murder before, more or less, 4 weeks, and it is murder afterwards.

Side: for abortion
GinKirk7256(25) Disputed
1 point

Abortion should NEVER be legal, chatturgha! It is always murder, and it is God who gives and God who takes away!

Side: against abortion