CreateDebate


Debate Info

1
6
Yes for the sake of humanity. No, let them choose whatever.
Debate Score:7
Arguments:8
Total Votes:7
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 Yes for the sake of humanity. (1)
 
 No, let them choose whatever. (4)

Debate Creator

peshorox(19) pic



Rape debate

If humanity was under atack by aliens, but somehow managed to defeat them and survive with only 200 hundred living people, 10 of them man the rest of them women and you as the president , would you legalize rape. Mind you before being defeated, the aliens managed to indoctrinate all the women to never agree to have sex with anyone of the opposite sex and you cannot change this by any other means than force.

Yes for the sake of humanity.

Side Score: 1
VS.

No, let them choose whatever.

Side Score: 6
1 point

In that case it would repopulate earth so yeah, and besides there are only a few men in this hypothetical so it would not genuinely be that harmful especially if a lot of the women had multiple children repopulating the earth at a quicker rate and at some point when earth has repopulated enough I would outlaw rape once again!

Side: Yes for the sake of humanity.
Depressed(355) Disputed
1 point

190 women would beat the crap out of 10 men. There'd be no way to legalise it. Most of the children would inherit the resistance to sex anyway.

Side: No, let them choose whatever.
2 points

With a few population left, unity is indispensable. By allowing yourself to be a little less civilized than animals, it will cause disorder which will spread and corrupt your community, leading for more heinous crimes that will be overlooked.

In the end, you are only courting your own extinction

Side: No, let them choose whatever.
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
1 point

I would argue that this would not necessarily be less civilized than animals. A surprising amount of mating in the animal kingdom is essentially rape, for lack of a better word.

Look at ducks. Look at flatworms. Look up the term traumatic insemination.

Side: Yes for the sake of humanity.

Even if the women were conditioned not to consent to sex- we're an intelligent species. I'm sure a significant portion of the women would see the necessity of breeding, despite having major conscious aversions to it. I could see some of this population intentionally inebriating themselves to suppress those aversions out of necessity.

In most people, hunger and thirst assumed to be already satisfied, sex is the number one driving instinct. I just can't see any amount of brainwashing being able to completely override that drive with a 100% success rate. With 190 women, even with a success rate of 99%, there would still be about 2 that it would fail on who would remain open to breeding without the need to do it reluctantly or while inebriated.

And if this is a random selection of females, one would assume that some of the population would be pregnant. No reason to believe that the brainwashing would carry on to the next generation.

In the event of complete brainwashing in all of the women, to the extent that it completely overrides both their instinct and their conscious mind- can they objectively even be said to be human anymore (and I mean in terms of the concept of humanity not the species homo sapiens sapiens)? Certainly individuals with that kind of mental trauma would not be able to integrate with normal society as we know it today; they would be institutionalized. Assuming brainwashing to this extent and none of the women are already pregnant, I suppose forcible mating would be a necessity for the survival of the species- though this can certainly be kept to a minimum, and purely to establish a new generation of non-brainwashed girls.

Side: No, let them choose whatever.
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
1 point

Maybe not the best source but...

http://wiki.answers.com/Q/Whatpercentageofthefemalepopulationispregnantaranyone_time

"at least 2.12% of all females, or 3.23% of women of roughly childbearing age, are pregnant in the US at any given time."

" at least 3.13% of females are pregnant, or at least 4.85% of women of roughly childbearing age."

So if we go US statistics, 4-6 of the women are likely to be pregnant. Global, 6-9 of them.

Side: Yes for the sake of humanity.
1 point

190 women would beat the crap out of 10 men. There'd be no way to legalise it. Most of the children would inherit the resistance to sex anyway.

Side: No, let them choose whatever.
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
1 point

One would think that the level of trauma required to indoctrinate women into overriding not only their own instincts, but their own conscious minds as well, would leave them in a pretty sorry state- probably in no condition to beat the crap out of anyone, even if outnumbering them 20:1.

No reason to expect that the resistance would be inherited, either...

Side: Yes for the sake of humanity.