CreateDebate


Debate Info

22
21
it is wrong it is not wrong
Debate Score:43
Arguments:44
Total Votes:45
More Stats

Argument Ratio

side graph
 
 it is wrong (19)
 
 it is not wrong (20)

Debate Creator

goodmale(1457) pic



is it wrong to take away an humans ability to reproduce?

it is wrong

Side Score: 22
VS.

it is not wrong

Side Score: 21
3 points

I am making this debate to see if taking away a haman ability is wrong. And if it is wrong then it would be also wrong to take away a animals ability.

Side: it is wrong
GuitarGuy(6096) Disputed
1 point

It's not like animals reproduce because they want to settle down and raise a family. They mate and then realize later that they had a baby inside of them. I don't think they plan it lol.

Side: it is not wrong
goodmale(1457) Disputed
1 point

they do plan it if you ever learned about mating session. But yes I don't think they want to have a family. they just want sex but the female knows what will happen after sex they know that they are going to have a baby so they get ready to give breath.

Side: it is wrong
thousandin1(1931) Clarified
1 point

Isn't that exactly how most human reproduction occurs these days?

Side: it is wrong
pakicetus(1455) Disputed
1 point

Sometimes a patient requests it (vasectomy, or sometimes it's for their own good (treating testicular cancer).

Side: it is not wrong
1 point

Slippery slope fallacy. One does not equal another. You cannot deny that humans have a higher level of neurological capacity than animals.

Side: it is not wrong
goodmale(1457) Disputed
1 point

I want you to spay your self and neuter your man. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side: it is wrong
2 points

Subjectively yes. If it was not with consent, as a vasectomy or tubal ligation is, it's wrong to force something on another creature, with intent to dominate or restrain.

Side: it is wrong
1 point

Yes. It is wrong to non-consensually take away a human's ability to reproduce.

As for the animal argument, well... it could be argued that by even owning a pet you are detaining an animal against its will though it has perpetrated no crime so taking away its reproductive ability is just an extension of that. Domesticating animals takes them out of their natural state and places them in a state of dependency on human beings for their survival. Is that not also wrong by that same logic?

In ancient times, Kings would order members of their court to be castrated so they wouldn't impregnate concubines which could potentially taint bloodlines resulting in an illegitimate heir to the throne. These people were considered pets in a strange regard- the palace fed them and provided them with shelter. Just taking the argument a bit deeper...

Side: it is wrong
goodmale(1457) Disputed
1 point

As for the animal argument, well... it could be argued that by even owning a pet you are detaining an animal against its will though it has perpetrated no crime so taking away its reproductive ability is just an extension of that.

.............

just because it no crime doesn't mean it right. it wrong to own someone. we know that but we do it anyway. I just don't want to add the feeling of being owned even more. And I don't think there is any better way in saying I own you by taking away parts of your body.

Side: it is not wrong
goodmale(1457) Disputed
1 point

sorry dude I didn't mean to dispute with you I pushed the wrong button

Side: it is not wrong
1 point

OMG WTF I did it again sorry again I didn't mean to dispute with you I pushed the wrong button

Side: it is wrong

I would say that it is wrong to remove a humans ability to reproduce in an irreversible, permanent way.

If, on the other hand, we were to use a hypothetical procedure that is both reliable at sterilizing the individual as well as reliably reversible, there is some potential application for the idea- but I'm not aware of a procedure that fits the bill; vasectomy and tubal ligation don't cut it, as neither has a reliable success rate after any meaningful period of time has passed.

Side: it is wrong
1 point

I agree with your statement. It would be great if an oral or injectible sterilization method (reliable) was available and would wear off over a given time unless administered again. This would be ideal...and great for birth control for young adults who want to have sex but do not want a child.

Side: it is wrong

Most of the time it is wrong. Including sex change operations we need docters to put their uses into more important maters.

Side: it is wrong
1 point

Well most cosmetic surgeons probably aren't even qualified to do medicinal work any way. Why is it wrong for some one to change themselves because they are not happy withwho they are?

Oh how you bible thumpers frustrate me.

Side: it is not wrong
1 point

They can't because:

REAL WORDS: It is wrong and not the way God intended.

WHAT IT KINDA SOUNDS LIKE: It is gross and I don't care about anyone other then myself.

Side: it is wrong
2 points

Ever heard of a vasectomy? The patient requests it.

Side: it is not wrong
1 point

It might be medical reasons that they need to be taken away plus surgeons have to have your permission, so it's the persons choice.

Side: it is not wrong

If the person wants to take away their ability to reproduce then nothing should be wrong with that. Particularly if you, as a woman, are tired of conceiving children. You should have the right to say "enough", and there should be nothing wrong with that.

Side: it is not wrong
goodmale(1457) Disputed
1 point

I was talking about if they were forced !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Side: it is wrong

Is it morally wrong to take the 15 year old boy who lives next door's "right" to have kids with your 13 year old daughter?

Side: it is not wrong

I want to get rid of my ability to conceive. The doctor has my permission, and for private reasons, i feel that this is my right.

Side: it is not wrong