CreateDebate



Welcome to CreateDebate!

CreateDebate is a social tool that democratizes the decision-making process through online debate. Join Now!
  • Find a debate you care about.
  • Read arguments and vote the best up and the worst down.
  • Earn points and become a thought leader!

To learn more, check out the FAQ or Tour.



Be Yourself

Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.

Make it even more personal by adding your own picture and updating your basics.


Twitter
Twitter addict? Follow us and be the first to find out when debates become popular!


pic
Report This User
Permanent Delete

Allies
View All
None

Enemies
View All
None

Hostiles
View All
None

RSS Aprihar

Reward Points:0
Efficiency: Efficiency is a measure of the effectiveness of your arguments. It is the number of up votes divided by the total number of votes you have (percentage of votes that are positive).

Choose your words carefully so your efficiency score will remain high.
100%
Arguments:1
Debates:0
meter
Efficiency Monitor
Online:


Joined:
2 points

Has anyone thought of an argument that fundamentally would fit with the pro-choice argument (btw I am pro-life)... even if the fetus is a "thing" and not a "person," it still belongs to both the father and the mother. This thing, then should be one-half the property of the father - it doesn't matter where it is located, does that ever matter with property? If that is the case, what right does the mother have to destroy his property without consent and/or compensation??? This seems to violate the basic property laws of Anglo-Saxon law to me... Furthermore, doesn't the father have a de facto trademark or copyright on his sperm??? It is a unique code, fully owned by him? Our world would certainly mandate his consent should we use his DNA for purposes of cloning, stem cell research, etc. Doesn't he own his genetic code - and isn't, at the point of conception, the embryo composed of half his DNA??? So then, I leave you, my pro-choice colleagues, with an intriguing question - Is it then proper that a joint owner in a partnership (a de facto partnership formed by two consenting adults who know the risks when they have intercourse - heck if you can have an oral contract, why can't sex form a contract of sorts???) single-handedly decides to destroy the whole of said company? In court cases, the murder of a pregnant mother counts as double homicide... This is due to the fact that the mother (obviously) didn't consent to her baby being aborted by these means. Then why shouldn't the father's lack of consent in such a case make a mother's decision to abort comparable to single homicide? In both cases, the end result is the same (disregarding the will of a parent of an embryo, and terminating a pregnancy without consent from a parent...)

Aprihar has not yet created any debates.

About Me


I am probably a good person but I haven't taken the time to fill out my profile, so you'll never know!


Want an easy way to create new debates about cool web pages? Click Here