Abortion is the murder of an innocent human life
The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.
After 4 votes and with 4 points ahead, the winner is...
- Publication date
- Last updated date
- Type
- Standard
- Number of rounds
- 5
- Time for argument
- Three days
- Max argument characters
- 500
- Voting period
- One month
- Point system
- Winner selection
- Voting system
- Open
The moment that a human sperm cell (the male gamete) fuses with a human egg cell (the female gamete) in what is known as “fertilization”, a single-cell, human diploid zygote, containing all of the genetic information necessary to proceed seamlessly (if uninterrupted by accident, disease, genetic defect, or external intervention) in the human developmental process (i.e. zygote, embryo, fetus, infant, toddler, child, adolescent, adult) is produced. Let us consider the following to help clarify some of that terminology:
“Gamete”
• Gametes, commonly referred to as an organism's reproductive cells or sex cells, are haploid cells (which means that they contain one set of chromosomes). In most humans, a gamete contains 23 chromosomes, or rather, half of a human’s genetic information (typically, each human has 46 chromosomes).
"Single-cell, human diploid zygote"
• The cell is the basic structural and functional unit of life forms. Only things that are living (or were living at one point or another) are composed of cells.
• A human is a member of the species "Homo sapiens". The fertilization of a human egg cell by a human sperm cell cannot produce anything other than a human cell.
• A diploid cell is a cell that contains two complete sets of chromosomes (23 chromosomes from the human male gamete and 23 chromosomes from the human female gamete). All of the cell types in our body, are diploid, except for gametes, which are haploid.
• A zygote is an organism within the animal kingdom, which is in the first stage of its developmental process. A zygote's genome (all of the genetic information of an organism) is a combination of the DNA in its parent’s gametes, and therefore, a zygote is a genetically distinct organism from its parents.
Murder is a legal term, not applicable to non-persons.
If the very existence of living human cells counts as a person
Laws are subjective, and ought to be for the very reason that justifiable homicide and murder differ. To kill another in self defense is not murder.
The hand given external resources could grow a full person.
The fetus likewise requires external resources to grow.
- It's criminal to force the unwilling to carry a fetus
- Eviction regardless of consequence ≠ murder
- Self-defense ≠ murder
"Should be" even if true, does not change things to make murder an applicable term for non-people.
A human hand given external resources of cloning, can indeed be grown into genetically distinct person.
Murder = unlawful killingAbortion = legal
murder = unjust killing
My opinion in that specific situation would be disappointment at the very least, quite likely more than that.
Most humans 'don't tend to help people though,
Least not all the time,
Beyond most humans expected willpower, possibly beyond expected 'care.
People 'have their money, their possessions,
Don't sell all of it and help the poor,
Walk by the homeless, the drugged,
Don't fight in wars,
Launch crusades of help in their neighborhoods.
. . .
Arguably abortion is not 'quite 'like seeing a baby drowning in a pond,
At the very least human perception/culture/reaction to it is different.
A pond is also pretty easy to wade in save the baby,
Not like it's a pond of acid.
Many Pro Life individuals also have lines they draw of where they are against abortion,
Rape, for some of them,
Compared to where they see the existence of the Yet Born in abortions of convenience, as being created in an act of callous disregard of the Yet born.
(Tossed the baby into the pond)
I don't think it is wrong/unexpected of Pro Life individuals for push for laws that help people,
As opposed to Pro Life individuals suffering great pain to help only who they can help individually.
A baby drowning in a pond is common and basic test applied to ethical systems. What does X command someone to do about it…
So what would your opinion be of people who run away from the pond to petition the government to force someone else to rescue said baby, yet refuse to do it themselves because they’re too special to be inconvenienced?
Somehow your question and statement go over my head,
Can you rephrase them?
If said people stood by and let babies drown in a pond for fear of getting their shoes wet, what would your opinion of them be?
Ethically it would be quite similar (basically identical in their opinion). The key difference is that much like the pregnant woman, they may opt for some future more willing person to carry the fetus to term.
"Doesn't mean people are wrong to push for laws that take kids from parents that beat/starve/neglect their kids"
Umm yes, it does mean that people are mostly wrong.
Children in foster care are also beaten and neglected, so really, anyone thinking children are being done some great favor is himself completely retarded and needs a brain.
Plus, often children get treated worse in foster care than by parents they are taken away from.
Its just that our current society is too retarded.
I believe that I am the only person on Earth with a working brain, which is mostly a curse to be honest.
Eh, some people don't want to adopt abused kids either,
Doesn't mean people are wrong to push for laws that take kids from parents that beat/starve/neglect their kids.
There was a limit of 500 characters, which caused things to have to be presented in their most simple form.
While I failed to get it across properly, if anyone has their feelings hurt by abortions, then they should preserve cells from each fetus for their later use. Ideally we’ll find a way to convert men into baby incubators, allowing for all men who oppose abortion to know the joys of pregnancy and prevent any “murders” from having occurred in abortions.
Somehow I doubt any of the anti abortion politicians would be willing to endure pregnancy were it an option.
Abortion is simply referring to the result of killing.. regardless of referring to the result of murder or not. Once you see the word "Abortion".. consider that the word "killing" is involved at all times.. even if it is legal or not. Morality is different for places and for people, for this necessary case.
Everybody party until barney writes "Cloning = copying" which is a very dangerous verbal mistake, it makes you consider if he is well educated on "the differences between words and their definitions"..
..Quite interesting.
Thanks again for the debate.
If you’d ever like advice on strengthening any arguments, just ask.
@Barney
In some ways a debate is nicer without participants giving lengthy explanation, that one might already be aware of,
Enough to reference fact/claim/study/idea.
@NoOneInParticular
Argument, not arguement.
Stupid spellcheck user, not 'looking close enough at the words, before changing arguement to agreement.
Thank you both for voting.
In both your votes you stated some of my thoughts much more articulately than I managed.
No problem!
The hand comparison was certainly difficult to tie together with just 500 characters.
Thanks for the vote.
And yeah, I did not have nearly enough characters to make the discussion of preserved human bits properly entertaining and logically valid. As was, it was kinda just there as little more than a side tangent.
Nice job on your first serious debate.
I rather enjoyed the unique challenge of the 500 character limit. While I don't like to prattle on too much, any one of my points would most likely normally take that many.
A really good resource for you is: https://tiny.cc/DebateArt
There's even a section in it on writing strong resolutions... Basically make it both minimal in contentions and precise in meaning (I've seen these debates kritiked with such things as animal abortions).
As Ponikshiy said, you'll also want to be assertive/proactive. For this debate, before even responding to me it would have been best to present your case for abortion being murder, and your case for the fetus being innocent.
Oh and your best defense to such odd contentions as the hand, is to say something like "If anything else is or is not murder, is outside the scope of this debate." My debates usually have some thing more for entertainment; in this case, I really did not have the characters to properly explain it.
Judges will use a form of abductive reasoning when judging a debate. I would advise you to present a better case that your opponent rather than simply arguing what I call.
"Nuh uh"
At most "nuh uh" mitigates your opponents arguments, it doesn't build your case.
Friendly reminder, you have one day remaining to post your opening argument.