CreateDebate


Debate Info

2
6
Screw the baby's rights Constitutional cherry picking
Debate Score:8
Arguments:8
Total Votes:8
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Screw the baby's rights (1)
 
 Constitutional cherry picking (6)

Debate Creator

ExKhan(42) pic



Does a baby have a Constitutional right to not be murdered?

Screw the baby's rights

Side Score: 2
VS.

Constitutional cherry picking

Side Score: 6
2 points

Does a baby have a Constitutional right to not be murdered?

Hello:

A "baby", yes. A "fetus", no.

Words matter.

excon

Side: Screw the baby's rights
LizardKahn(128) Disputed
1 point

A "baby", yes. A "fetus", no.

Abortion clinics abort babies after birth. Murder or no?

Words matter

Says the party that has redefined and created so many words that's it damn near a whole new language.

Side: Constitutional cherry picking
1 point

A fetus is still a living being. It's just being developed so a fetus counts. I studied biology to know that fetuses are living.

Side: Constitutional cherry picking
Norwich(744) Clarified
1 point

@ LizardKahn;-

Abortion clinics only carry out ''after-birth abortions'' (what is sometimes called, euthanasia,) when all parties concerned, i.e., the attending gynecologists, the mother, and usually the father as well, decide that the newborn's abnormalities are so grave that they would represent an intolerable millstone around the necks of the mother/father and wider family.

''After birth abortions'' are not performed willy-nilly but are the subject of proper planning and due consideration of the best options for all parties concerned.

How the self-righteous, holier-than-thou prigs enjoy moralizing over issues they've never had to face on a personal or professional basis.

Side: Screw the baby's rights
1 point

Yes absolutely. He or she is a new human born into this world. Otherwise, it is murder. If this isn't a serious post though, I'd say the post maker is a troll and this would be the bait. Despite I'm here, I will say the truth regardless.

I find it hilarious how the right side is "cherry picking" when the left side obviously is exactly what it is; Lefitists today are cherry picking what they like and don't like. It's now wonder trolls like norwich and "sciencerules" will always lose in every debate. They are hypocrites of the left claiming to be helpful in society.

Side: Constitutional cherry picking
1 point

Abortionists claim it is women's right to kill a baby. Yet, who decided to have sex with a man? The woman and the man. The responsibility falls on both of them. Killing the baby will mean blood on your hands. Abortionists fail to hear the story of real women who have experienced real abortions. It's not a pretty situation. Abortionists claim fetuses are not living yet they were once a fetus too, in his or her mother's womb. Abortionists are hypocrites in dehumanizing other developing fetuses within a mother's womb, while claiming they are "progressive" in the process? I think not!! All abortionists should be arrested, tried and executed if necessary because killing babies without a conscience is subject towards devilish Moloch worship. Yes, Moloch is the demon of hell who flourishes in infant blood sacrifice. I do not care what atheists say. Their arguments are invalidated what so ever. Their deluded hypocrisy is what drives them to think God isn't real, and sometimes, claim there is no good nor evil, yet the killing of babies is evil itself. Relativism at it's finest within the anarchy loving hypocritical snowflakes of the leftist extremist socialist dystopia!

Side: Constitutional cherry picking
1 point

Baby lives matter and I will say, I am glad some state leaders have come to the conclusion that abortion is murder; infanticide.

Side: Constitutional cherry picking
1 point

After birth abortions which are usually euphemisically referred to as euthanasia, ( which is illegal) and only carried out when it is considered that the newborn's abnormalities are so severe they would be an intolerable burden to the mother/family.

So called after birth abortions only occure in circumstances when the foetus's abnormalities were not detectable before birth.

Therefore, as such decisions are made by professional gynaecologists in conjunction with the mother or, as in most cases, with both parents, it my opinion that ''after birth abortions'' (euthanasia of newborns) ARE JUSTIFIED.

WHO TO HELL ARE WE to tell a mother-to-be to proceed with her unwanted pregnancy or the mother of a newborn to struggle for all or the best part of her remaining life to rear a child whose abnormalities are so severe that it will be nothing but a vegetable for the duration of its life?

The sanctimonious drivel I have read from some participants here, none of whom, (like me thank God,) I'm sure have ever had to face such a heart-breaking decision, is nauseating.

Side: Constitutional cherry picking