CreateDebate


Debate Info

18
24
No! We are all equal! Yes! They should!
Debate Score:42
Arguments:58
Total Votes:56
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 No! We are all equal! (12)
 
 Yes! They should! (18)

Debate Creator

leiavandiver(9) pic



Should people with Learning Disabilities/ Physical Disabilities be treated different?

Should we all be treated equal? Tell me your opinions below!

No! We are all equal!

Side Score: 18
VS.

Yes! They should!

Side Score: 24
0 points

You do realize that when I meet fools, I ignore them. So tell me if I'm such a fool, why do you keep stalking me? If I'm doing Liberals no harm and am hurting Conservatives, you should be supporting me. But no, your words are a lie like everything else you say. Do you have clue what that says about you?

The sick thing about Liberals is their paranoia and fears over others hearing dissenting opinions. They must censor any thought going against their Liberal ideology. They must demonize those on the Right. Their notion of diversity is transgender drag queens. When it comes to Conservative thought, they hate your guts and try to silence your opinions.

Side: No! We are all equal!
3 points

I don't think you understand what it means to disagree with someone.

"The sick thing about Liberals is their paranoia and fears over others hearing dissenting opinions. " You are the one that bans Liberals from your debates, and you really have the audacity to accuse the left of censorship? Hypocrisy at its finest. Especially considering how you go on to accuse us of demonizing, after comparing us to Hitler, and endless other insults.

Side: Yes! They should!
-2 points
JustIgnoreMe(3581) Clarified
4 points

You mean the Democrats that created the Special Olympics?

Letting women decide when they are in the best position to know all of the circumstances, when government making it illegal is of little to no impact, when only 1% of abortions happen after 20 weeks (and many of those are wanted pregnancies) is different than encouraging abortions of special needs kids. Why do you think that abortions after 20 weeks happen so frequently and frivolously? Why is it not enough to use your free speech to encourage women to not get abortions and to counsel them on available alternatives rather than having big government decide which "extreme cases" are worthy? Define "exteme cases".

Side: No! We are all equal!
2 points

1. No, the Democratic Party (no such thing as the Democrat Party) does not support killing special needs kids.

2. No, the Democratic Party does not support late term abortion for any cause.

3. You do not care that the Republican Party is playing political games with abortion.

Enough with the hyper partisanship and lies.

Side: Yes! They should!
Cuaroc(8826) Clarified
1 point

as usual you just rant about democrats.

Side: No! We are all equal!

For my argument I would like you to think of a human that is so mentally handicapped, that they just sit in a chair and drool all day. The human cannot feed itself or properly go to the bathroom. Any attempted communication consists of random incomprehensible screams and wails.

Physical disabilities? No.

Mental disabilities? Yes.

I find that people with with mental disabilities (particularly severe retardation cases such as anencephaly) are a problem to society. Because of their mental state, they are not beneficial to the world in the way of contributing something.

For comparison, a person with a physical disability (such as a missing arm or leg) can still contribute to the world via mental skills and abilities. A person with a severe mental disability that renders them incapable of even the most menial tasks cannot do anything; they are literally (I feel) just a parasitic drain on resources.

If an incapable being is completely unwanted by everyone and anything, is it immoral to consider its termination? Is it wrong to destroy such a thing just because it is alive? Think of it as this: Would you keep a cancerous tumour alive?

To put it bluntly I believe that beings that match what I have described above, should be terminated to maintain the integrity of society.

Note: I've got the feeling that my post is going to be flamed hard; therefore I have brought hot dogs and marshmallows :D

Side: Yes! They should!
Harvard(659) Disputed
1 point

I disagree with your physicality notion.

What if one were paralyzed from the neck down and had average intelligence (100IQ)? Of course Hawkings is beneficial and useful but what if someone were not that smart? Just because they have a conscious awareness that mentally retards don't does not make their brain a utility.

I agree with the vegetable notion.

Side: No! We are all equal!
Idiotobx914(1341) Clarified
1 point

What if one were paralyzed from the neck down and had average intelligence (100IQ)? Of course Hawkings is beneficial and useful but what if someone were not that smart? Just because they have a conscious awareness that mentally retards don't does not make their brain a utility.

I find that there is a distinct difference between someone who is stupid and paralysed and someone who is mentally retarded. I believe that a mentally retarded being (depending on the severity of the retardation) cannot even measure up to a stupid person in terms of intellect or even personality.

To put it simply, I do not think a stupid paralysed person is even remotely similar to a retard in that they still have a life: they can still learn, communicate, share ideas, have goals and dreams, and generally still be a person (albeit restricted).

Side: No! We are all equal!
Atrag(5448) Disputed
1 point

What if one were paralyzed from the neck down and had average intelligence (100IQ)? Of course Hawkings is beneficial and useful but what if someone were not that smart? Just because they have a conscious awareness that mentally retards don't does not make their brain a utility.

I presume, like always, you are valuing people based on their earning / inheritance-grabbing potential. This is not the value of a human being. A human being contributes to society by the relationships he makes. If someone falls in love with him he is of value to them. If his parents love him, he is of value to them.

Side: Yes! They should!
1 point

No, not at all. You can't hold a person with Down's Syndrome to have the same potential as someone who doesn't.

To treat them equally would be utterly cruel.

Side: Yes! They should!
1 point

Personaly as a Tard myself I hate it when people treat me differently.

Side: Yes! They should!

Judging from my time in Primary school many children with learning difficulties do not have boundaries that other children have. Therefore they tend to antagonize or even attack the other children unprovoked. It sounds harsh but it is the truth. I think because of this they need to be supervised and treated differently by adults and should not go to the same school children who don't have them. This doesn't count children with mild learn disabilities though.

Side: Yes! They should!