CreateDebate is a social debate community built around ideas, discussion and democracy.
If this is your first time checking out a debate, here are some quick tips to help get you started:
Arguments with the highest score are displayed first.
Argument replies (both in favor and in opposition) are displayed below the original argument.
To follow along, you may find it helpful to show and hide the replies displayed below each argument.
To vote for an argument, use these icons:
You have the power to cast exactly one vote (either up or down) for each argument.
Once you vote, the icon will become grayed out and the argument's score will change.
Yes, you can change your vote.
Debate scores, side scores and tag scores are automatically calculated by an algorithm that primarily takes argument scores into account.
All scores are updated in real-time.
To learn more about the CreateDebate scoring system, check out the FAQ.
When you are ready to voice your opinion, use the Add Argument button to create an argument.
If you would like to address an existing argument, use the Support and Dispute link within that argument to create a new reply.
Pro-lifers aren't against abortion because they are anti-woman, they are against it because they think abortion is murder and they believe murdering someone is worse than a woman being inconvenienced by a pregnancy. The gender of the person is irrelevant. If scientists came up with a way for men to be pregnant they would still be against abortion.
It's unlikely that you're going to convince pro-lifers that abortion isn't killing, so if you're going to tackle the abortion issue I think you should focus more on the core question to the debate, why is killing wrong? I think you'll find that most answers to that question aren't applicable to fetuses in the first 2 trimesters.
Your other debate is also a good point. I would focus more on those types of arguments than the women's rights aspect of it because pro-lifers think a fetus's rights are just as valid as the woman's.
The individual may not be anti-woman, but there is still a case for the position being anti-woman.
While the intention behind the position may be focused upon abortion as murder, the position has when enacted into policy is arguably harmful to women. While it is reasonable to conclude that the person holding the view may not be anti-woman absent sexist intent, I do not know that the same can be said about the position itself.
Opposed:not agreeing with or approving of something or someone
The anti-abortion position isn't "opposed to" women. It isn't about "not agreeing with or approving of" women. It's about not agreeing with what they believe to be murder. A side-effect of their position may be a major inconvenience to women, but that doesn't necessarily make it opposed to or against women themselves. I think if we stick to the actual definition of the word anti it's not truly anti-woman. However, I get what you're trying to say and we're probably just arguing over semantics here.
Yes, you have turned this into a semantic game. Here, let me play: Against:in opposition or hostility to.Hostility:an unfriendly or hostile state, attitude, or action.Etc.
I think you do grasp the distinction I was making, as well as the intended point. I am not especially interested in getting mired in semantics when we both know what the point being made.
While I'm pro-choice, I don't believe that being anti-abortion means being anti-woman.
While there are different takes on it, for the most part the pro-life position is essentially stating that an unborn child is a person with the same rights as any child that has already been born. As such, being anti-abortion is more of a position of 'equality' than anything else for most holding that opinion. It is a position that I would hold myself, were I to assign personhood to an unborn fetus- but knowing what I know, I can't do that in good conscience.
There are certainly exceptions; a particularly loud minority, even if they don't say so directly, demonstrate that they value the fetus more than the woman due to asserting that a woman should carry the child to term even if doing so puts her life at significant risk. There are also those who simply want to control women, and use their political stance on abortion as one of many tools to do so. There is overlap between these two groups.
But these exceptions are not a majority, and do not represent pro-lifers as a whole.
Many people are quite vocal and militant about this issue, and the pro-choice take on it is that pro-choice represents equality and pro-life represents oppression; that's not how I see it. I see it as pro-life represents equality (between the woman and the growing fetus), and pro-choice represents being pro-woman in that scenario. I am pro-choice myself, and just fine with that definition.
A feminist who considers pro-life to be an anti-woman position would probably argue that pro-life women have simply been indoctrinated by the patriarchy. They would look at them as the 'Uncle Toms' of female rights.
The core of the pro life movement has nothing to do with degrading women or putting them down. Liberals just need to face facts they don't have a monopoly on women or minorities.
I wasn't suggesting that the pro-life movement has anything to do with degrading women or putting them down- take a look at my other post on this side; it has been USED to degrade and put women down by some, but that's not saying the movement itself is.
Also, why the dispute? You haven't actually disputed my statement, which was an explanation of how pro-choice feminists who conflate pro-life with being anti-woman would classify a pro-life woman. If you don't believe this, I would direct you to several blogs run by extreme feminists.
You can link any two words if one aspect of them coincides but it people who say that if you don't agree with abortion then you must be anti-woman is being absurd. You can be pro-women's rights but believe that sometimes the rights of the fetus are more important.
You can link any two words if one aspect of them coincides but it people who say that if you don't agree with abortion then you must be anti-woman is being absurd.
Yes, this I agree with. I tried to stress this to the debate creater in the previous debate. I couldn't get through to her.
Better yet, she should go tell that to a woman who just miscarried... No need to worry it wasn't a b a b y. It was a p o t e n t i a l baby... feel better now? Changing words around to try to combat reality is fun isn't it?
Precisely. Simply changing the words does not deter how a typical woman views her own pregnancy. She will, in most cases, announce the baby as a "baby".
FMITA, this is getting old. Stop using the appeal to emotionj fallacy. You act like Im running around telling women that they will birth the reptilian antichrist and they should abort now. The whole point of being prochoice is being in favor of a womans right to choose and that includes parenthood. My friend is pregnant is she is such a cutie. I dont look down on her. I alos keep my opinion to myself if someone has a msciarriage or their baby dies after birth. Prochoicers are quite capable of not being Nazi bitches.
I'm really tired of your poor understanding in logical fallacies. This isn't an appeal to emotion, but an appeal to possesion and naming. This is similar to me walking into someone's home and demanding them to hand over their firearm because I don't think they should have it. It doesn't work that way.
You act like Im running around telling women that they will birth the reptilian antichrist and they should abort now.
Yes, because that's exactly the point I wanted to get across.
You obviously cannot understand basic arguments.
Prochoicers are quite capable of not being Nazi bitches.
Ex (From the site): After Sally presents an eloquent and compelling case for a more equitable taxation system, Sam asks the audience whether we should believe anything from a woman who isn't married, was once arrested, and smells a bit weird.
The rights of the woman come first. It ios really disrespectful to imply that this is a convenience thing. You will never have a pregnancy scare. I have. I had a pregnancy scare. I thought I was pregnant by my rapist after I was raped. That was not a convenience issue in any way shape form or fashion. You are a forced birther, not a prolifer. Prolifers value the needs of the woman first.
Then you obviously fell outside of the scope of the relationship I mentioned. I don't think anyone could sit down and rationally think its ok to make abortion illegal in cases of rape. The pro-life argument is supposed to be an argument of compassion, forcing a rape victim through a resulting pregnancy isn't consistent with that spirit.
For rape victims, it is not a matter of convenience, it is a matter of recovering from a trauma.
For women who are in danger from a pregnancy, it is not about convenience, it is about survival.
For cases of birth defects, it is not a matter of convenience, it is a matter of compassion.
Outside of those cases, the choice to have an abortion is simply one of selfishness and irresponsibility.
Where is this right written? Is it in the constitution? When was it voted on...? Think about this 4real... It took just 5 people to give women the "right" to an abortion nation wide... It only takes 5 to reconcile that lapse in judgement.
The women has the right to their body. The woman have the right to be pregant. You dont have the god damn right to dictate what a woman does with her own body. If a woman wants to end the pregnancy, that is her right.
And again I ask where was it written? Where is it in the Constitution? And when was it voted on. Roe v Wade may have made women of lose character sleep a little easier at night, but at the same time the entire population of the country was robbed of the very real right to govern themselves as they desire. The same kind of mistake was made in Lawrence v Texas, and will likely be made again this year or next when the SCOUTS miracles a right to gay marriage into the constitution.
Each of these decrees are devoid of the one element that makes a law valid and enduring; the will of the people.
If you want a constitutional right to an abortion, make an amendment... Until that happens, these "rights" are just smoke and mirrors. Americans will not tolerate being subjects to an over-ambitious Supreme Court for much longer.
It is her body, and her choice. You have no right to dictate someone elses private choices regarding their bodies. Forced gestation is slavery. Her body, her choice, end of story. And the people do not have the right to tell me what to do what my body.
I don't understand how fetuses are not alive in the eyes of some people. To grow, you have to have life. Pro-life is on the premise of stopping horrible murder. When you allow abortion, you leave the door open for far worse atrocities.