CreateDebate


Debate Info

Debate Score:23
Arguments:16
Total Votes:27
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Should a woman have rights over her body? SHE DOES, but not over the baby's body! (16)

Debate Creator

FromWithin(8241) pic



Should a woman have rights over her body? SHE DOES, but not over the baby's body!

I laugh every time I hear pro abortion people spew the same ludicrous rhetoric about how a woman has rights over her body, but the baby inside of her has no rights.

THERE ARE TWO HUMAN LIVES INVOLVED! Both lives should be protected as is the mother's when it is an extreme case life of mother situation (which is supported), or the life of the baby when there is no extreme case.

The mentality of pro choice people is beyond rational. Many of them support the right of life of a mass murderer, or even the right of life of animals, but when it comes to even innocent viable babies, the Left screams...NO RESTRICTION ABORTIONS! NO CHOICE FOR THE BABY!

This is what becomes of mankind when they do all in their power to separate God and moral values from a nation. They lose all discernment when it comes to simple common sense humanity. We are all witnessing the fall of a nation from within. It won't be Russia or China that defeats America, it will be man's own selfish inhumanity towards each other.
Add New Argument
2 points

Well said. I left the liberal movement over abortion and trannies among other things. I believe the rights to choice begin with fertilization or implantation, and it's wrong to kill the Image bearer of the Living God. I say this because of the Bible and science. If a woman does not want to be a mother, she needs to use contraception or have a baby. Elective abortion is SELFISH and NOT a right, stupid proaborts. Women who use abortion as a contraceptive are WHORES! If you can't use contraception, DON'T HAVE SEX. Rape victims can take the Ella pill, so no excuses, proaborts. I think proabortion women should be FORCED to have their tubes removed to prevent a MURDER.

JimboR(87) Disputed
1 point

Yet another person who doesn't understand rights. Force women to have their tubes tide? That's completely asinine and contravenes bodily rights.

Please demonstrate how reproductive rights are in fact not rights at all.

Elective abortion should be legal up to 24 weeks, and then after only in special circumstances. The fetus cannot feel pain before 27 weeks and as it hasn't been born there won't be any suffering to friends and family. You would have a hard time saying it is morally wrong in the absence of suffering.

Sitar(3680) Disputed
2 points

Yes I do think mothers should be forced to choose life, and I think proabortion women should be forced to have their tubes removed. Abortion outside of medical need is always murder. If you don't want a baby, use contraception, or don't have sex.

You possess God's common sense humanity. The Left and the Democrat Party have sold their souls for convienence and votes.

1 point

Anyone that thinks murdering babies is mentally ill, and so are people who try to change their gender....................................................

Atrag(5666) Banned
1 point

You have said this literally 1000s of times now. What the fuck do you expect this time?

FromWithin(8241) Disputed
2 points

When I keep seeing debates created supporting the killing of unborn babies, I will continue to my last breath. When I see hypocrites spewing their phoney so called compassion for others while supporting even no restriction abortions, I will never stop showing them for the hypocrites they are.

You chose to not respond to the debate topic, so bye.

1 point

Should a woman have rights over her body? SHE DOES, but not over the baby's body!

I'll just do the ol switcheroo:

Should a baby have rights over its body? IT DOES, but not over the womans body!

See how that works? Just as valid.

Sitar(3680) Disputed
2 points

Use contraception, or don't have sex, and rape victims can take the Ella pill. Why do you think I consented to having my tubes removed? I don't want children or an abortion, so this was the right choice for me.

FromWithin(8241) Disputed
1 point

Yes, I see clearly how it works. I told you in my debate, a woman has the right of life over her body.

The baby should also have the right of life over it's body unless it is a life of mother exception. We do allow the mother a special right where her life supercedes the baby's life in rare cases where the life of mother is in jeapordy.

In most other cases, both lives should have a right to life. See how it should work were it not for the inhumanity of pro choice people on the Left and in the Democrat Party?

JimboR(87) Disputed
0 points

 I told you in my debate, a woman has the right of life over her body.

The right to life and bodily rights are two separate things. In fact body rights is an umbrella term that contains many different rights.

The baby should also have the right of life over it's body unless it is a life of mother exception. We do allow the mother a special right where her life supercedes the baby's life in rare cases where the life of mother is in jeapordy

But why do the rights of the child supersede that of the mother?