The premeditated and willful removal of a fetus by all causes other than any form of spontaneous miscarriage, birth, or delivery procedure. The Plan B pill does not count as a spontaneous miscarriage.
Well, since you were talking about how there would be a mass slaughtering of all meat in every meat farm, the least you could have done, before stating it like a fact ant not a hypothetical, was found a single CEO of a meat company, or an expert on the meat industry, or even, at minimum, a news article, that mentions it. Considering the seriousness of the claim.
Hypotheticals are discussed all the time. Experts, news articles, and UN Meetings regularly discuss hypotheticals. Wouldn't have been that difficult to find... Unless you're the only person who thinks it would happen.
And, FWIW, if you have fewer reliable sources than someone else, you did not have "more reliable sources." And certainly did not have better reliable sources. How could that possibly be? If you cite 3 experts and the other person cites 2, it doesn't matter if one expert is better than another. They are all experts. Unless there is an obvious disparity (like one expert got the Nobel Prize and the other 2 from your opponent are graduates of Full Sail University), the person with more reliable sources has better sources by definition.
If you'd have had more source material to back up your side, it would have been a tie. But you didn't. A simple counting exercise reveals this.
I wasn't "sloppy." I was unimpressed by both parties for half of the debate, the only clear determiner here was more reliable sources, which went to PRO.
All you had to do was back up the mass slaughtering and some of your views earlier than you did, and you might have won it out. But PRO literally didn't get sources for half of your major arguments until at least round 3. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. That holds true even if you're RationalMadman.
I'm saying black people don't inherently have a different prefrontal cortex than anyone else, and that testosterone has not been linked to crime in years.
The prefrontal cortex in every rece is the same size, because there's no "races."
Yes but Allah is not the same as the Judeo-Christian God. Your Quran says so in 17:111, 5:48, and 5:72.
It blatantly states Jesus is not God and there is no Holy Spirit, which contradicts the Christian Scriptures completely, in John 1:1, John 15:26-27, and Genesis 1:26.
I've also seen it argued (wrongly) that a Plan B pill causes a spontaneous miscarriage. Even though this doesn't make any sense, considering it literally causes the miscarriage to happen, making it an induced miscarriage, I didn't want to waste time debating that when the real issue at hand is whether the act of aborting the child is murder.
Just so it's clear. Nothing in the definitions say:
1. That the fetus is a human being
2. That it is alive in the womb.
So if you still believe this debate is too hard to win, then it really shows that, ultimately, you agree that abortion is murder.
This should be a pretty straightforward debate if you honestly think the fetus isn't a human being or alive. But since nobody has dared to take this one, it seems apparent that I have won the debate before even starting.
I changed the definition of fetus. Apparently people thought I was trying to set a trap with it.
I used baby because the two are synonyms in my head. Fetus means baby in the womb. But I changed it because I didn't want people getting the wrong idea.
You made the determination it is alive, and a human, not the definitions. You all must inherently agree the fetus is a living human being, in which case you all agree abortion is murder and my work here is done lol.
My gut feeling was to give Novice the argument vote, but I didn't feel it was clear enough to support outright. Though I could have made a case for it. My opinions on the debate arguments are still there though. Overall I did think Novice did a better job than RM on arguments, but both of you didn't really fully convince me on anything except for sources. That was the ultimate defining line for me.
I got tired of seeing these silly debates where people got demolished over "SpOnTAneOUs MisCaRRiaGeS CouNT As ABoRtiOnS." The question is simple, is the physical act of having a doctor remove a fetus out of a woman's body murder or not? Ditto for the Plan B pill.
I made it 1700 because I want to have a challenging debate on this issue. I believe this topic is a slam shut victory for PRO. I believe it is extremely difficult to argue that abortion is not murder.
However, I will accept AustinL0926 if he expresses interest because he will clearly surpass 1700 within months. Shoot, he might even become #1 ranked in time with the amount of debates he can have at once and still bring an A game.
Yeah. Well. That's what happens when you side with Nazis and lose. Your land gets redistributed to people who owned it thousands of years ago and were displaced by Muslims.
"likely innocent" you kept forgetting the "likely" which you conceded anyways in the debate when you went on about how Innocence is impossible to prove.
I see what you're saying, but you're arguing against extra trials to prevent innocent convictions in that process.
You say you want to improve LWOP trials, but you didn't really explain how in the rebuttals. In fewer innocent people are given the death penalty due to the many trials, then it stands to reason only guilty people get the death penalty anyways, and what is wrong with that?
LWOP is also torture for the inmate, a removal of their rights, and if we draw out the legal process for LWOP, it's still the same trauma to the family anyways.
I see where you're coming from. I am against the death penalty myself. But for those reasons I had to vote CON.
So, you agreed the many retrials prevented innocent deaths from occurring and then said this is bad because it brings trauma to the family.
This is why I handed it to CON, because sending innocent people to their death was precisely an argument you gave against the death penalty in your initial round, and LWOP actually has the potentiality to do just that in a much larger number since there are significantly fewer retrials. They basically just await their death in prisons, as CON pointed out, which you dropped completely.
When you said:
"Second of all, death penalty cases have a long and lengthy appeal process, which can bring trauma to both the accused’s and victim’s family. Far from bringing peace and closure, this process, which can take several decades, only opens old wounds."
In your R1.
And here:
"Reversed. The death penalty does not bring closure to a victim’s family; instead, it does the opposite. Death penalty cases have a long and lengthy appeals process to minimize innocent convictions. This process can take several decades. These are several decades in which the victim’s family has to relive the trauma over and over again."
You then quote a judge that wished she didn't hand out death penalties because of the many retrials that followed which caused trauma for the families as an argument for LWOP, which doesn't have these extra trials.
To me it seemed pretty clear you were against the idea of additional trials to prevent death penalties from being given out willy nilly. In fact it really seemed like you believed that LWOP is better precisely because it DOESN'T have extra trials.
U am on my phone and don't see the option to lower the rating so Sir.Lancelot can accept. Can you lower the rating for me?
The premeditated and willful removal of a fetus by all causes other than any form of spontaneous miscarriage, birth, or delivery procedure. The Plan B pill does not count as a spontaneous miscarriage.
*argue whether.
If you accept this debate under those pretendes, then I will amend the description to read "except birth or delivery procedures"
Well, I'm not going to argue that a delivery or c-section isn't an abortion.
Ok.
So, I guess this instead?
The deliberate termination of a human pregnancy in all forms except spontaneous miscarriage and delivery.
Though, to be clear, any form of delivery and c-section doesn't count as termination of pregnancy.
Of course I wouldn't. That is a spontaneous miscarriage. That isn't murder because it isn't premeditated.
Will you settle for:
The deliberate termination of a human pregnancy in all forms except spontaneous miscarriage.
If you want this one I'll drop the rating to 1632.
Well, since you were talking about how there would be a mass slaughtering of all meat in every meat farm, the least you could have done, before stating it like a fact ant not a hypothetical, was found a single CEO of a meat company, or an expert on the meat industry, or even, at minimum, a news article, that mentions it. Considering the seriousness of the claim.
Hypotheticals are discussed all the time. Experts, news articles, and UN Meetings regularly discuss hypotheticals. Wouldn't have been that difficult to find... Unless you're the only person who thinks it would happen.
And, FWIW, if you have fewer reliable sources than someone else, you did not have "more reliable sources." And certainly did not have better reliable sources. How could that possibly be? If you cite 3 experts and the other person cites 2, it doesn't matter if one expert is better than another. They are all experts. Unless there is an obvious disparity (like one expert got the Nobel Prize and the other 2 from your opponent are graduates of Full Sail University), the person with more reliable sources has better sources by definition.
If you'd have had more source material to back up your side, it would have been a tie. But you didn't. A simple counting exercise reveals this.
I wasn't "sloppy." I was unimpressed by both parties for half of the debate, the only clear determiner here was more reliable sources, which went to PRO.
All you had to do was back up the mass slaughtering and some of your views earlier than you did, and you might have won it out. But PRO literally didn't get sources for half of your major arguments until at least round 3. What can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence. That holds true even if you're RationalMadman.
I'm saying black people don't inherently have a different prefrontal cortex than anyone else, and that testosterone has not been linked to crime in years.
The prefrontal cortex in every rece is the same size, because there's no "races."
https://www.mentalhealthjournal.org/articles/prefrontal-cortex-response-to-threat-race-by-age-variation-in-9-10-year-old-children.html
https://psychnews.psychiatryonline.org/doi/full/10.1176/appi.pn.2020.8a16
Without defining better this debate could mean anything.
Natural diamonds are better than lab grown diamonds at being natural diamonds, for instance.
That could be a legitimate argument and I'd win the debate since we never defined better.
I sincerely hope you're joking.
Your hormones and brain structure don't make you a criminal. That stuff has been debunked since the 90s.
Thank you for considering me, but I know almost nothing about boxing history so I would not be a good judge.
Well, in Christianity (and traditional judaism) the trinity is one essence but three persons. So it is One God and three Distinct Persons.
Islam directly opposes this idea in the portions of the Quran I cited.
Right. So then by definition we do not worship the same God.
I don't, because, you know, biology. But some definitely do.
All good!
Yes but Allah is not the same as the Judeo-Christian God. Your Quran says so in 17:111, 5:48, and 5:72.
It blatantly states Jesus is not God and there is no Holy Spirit, which contradicts the Christian Scriptures completely, in John 1:1, John 15:26-27, and Genesis 1:26.
So your god is not our God.
Remind me to vote on this one. I am debating on voting on it.
I've also seen it argued (wrongly) that a Plan B pill causes a spontaneous miscarriage. Even though this doesn't make any sense, considering it literally causes the miscarriage to happen, making it an induced miscarriage, I didn't want to waste time debating that when the real issue at hand is whether the act of aborting the child is murder.
Because I wanted to make it clear that it counts as abortion. That's all. It technically creates a miscarriage.
if you'd like, I'll debate you on whether God and Allah are the same person. I don't believe they are the same by any means at all.
Thanks for the vote!
Just so it's clear. Nothing in the definitions say:
1. That the fetus is a human being
2. That it is alive in the womb.
So if you still believe this debate is too hard to win, then it really shows that, ultimately, you agree that abortion is murder.
This should be a pretty straightforward debate if you honestly think the fetus isn't a human being or alive. But since nobody has dared to take this one, it seems apparent that I have won the debate before even starting.
I changed "termination" to "removal."
Hence the reason I chose dictionaries and put specific definitions...
Thanks for your vote!
No. As clearly stated in the debate prompt, I want to debate whether abortion is murder.
This isn't Kafka Trapping. I literally want to debate whether non-spontaneous-miscarriage abortion is murder. Pretty straightforward.
Is the problem with termination of a fetus? Should I change it to expulsion of a fetus? Is that the problem?
With the changed definition of fetus, I don't think you'll have that problem anymore, since a fetus is an unborn vertebrate of its kind.
I changed the definition of fetus. Apparently people thought I was trying to set a trap with it.
I used baby because the two are synonyms in my head. Fetus means baby in the womb. But I changed it because I didn't want people getting the wrong idea.
You made the determination it is alive, and a human, not the definitions. You all must inherently agree the fetus is a living human being, in which case you all agree abortion is murder and my work here is done lol.
Ok. I'll add "of a human being" lol. Good point.
Definition of murder from the U.S. Code:
Murder is the unlawful killing of a human being with malice aforethought.
So... Premeditated killing...
https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/18/1111
Thanks for voting!
No they aren't.
Because I wanted to debate the topic, so I liked those definitions better.
How is that possible? Did you receive a head injury or something?
Thanks guys!
My gut feeling was to give Novice the argument vote, but I didn't feel it was clear enough to support outright. Though I could have made a case for it. My opinions on the debate arguments are still there though. Overall I did think Novice did a better job than RM on arguments, but both of you didn't really fully convince me on anything except for sources. That was the ultimate defining line for me.
I believe forfeiting 50% of the debate counts as a full forfeit. But even if it doesn't, vote would be appreciated.
I got tired of seeing these silly debates where people got demolished over "SpOnTAneOUs MisCaRRiaGeS CouNT As ABoRtiOnS." The question is simple, is the physical act of having a doctor remove a fetus out of a woman's body murder or not? Ditto for the Plan B pill.
I made it 1700 because I want to have a challenging debate on this issue. I believe this topic is a slam shut victory for PRO. I believe it is extremely difficult to argue that abortion is not murder.
However, I will accept AustinL0926 if he expresses interest because he will clearly surpass 1700 within months. Shoot, he might even become #1 ranked in time with the amount of debates he can have at once and still bring an A game.
"basically it sucks that it happened."
Yeah. Well. That's what happens when you side with Nazis and lose. Your land gets redistributed to people who owned it thousands of years ago and were displaced by Muslims.
"likely innocent" you kept forgetting the "likely" which you conceded anyways in the debate when you went on about how Innocence is impossible to prove.
I see what you're saying, but you're arguing against extra trials to prevent innocent convictions in that process.
You say you want to improve LWOP trials, but you didn't really explain how in the rebuttals. In fewer innocent people are given the death penalty due to the many trials, then it stands to reason only guilty people get the death penalty anyways, and what is wrong with that?
LWOP is also torture for the inmate, a removal of their rights, and if we draw out the legal process for LWOP, it's still the same trauma to the family anyways.
I see where you're coming from. I am against the death penalty myself. But for those reasons I had to vote CON.
So, you agreed the many retrials prevented innocent deaths from occurring and then said this is bad because it brings trauma to the family.
This is why I handed it to CON, because sending innocent people to their death was precisely an argument you gave against the death penalty in your initial round, and LWOP actually has the potentiality to do just that in a much larger number since there are significantly fewer retrials. They basically just await their death in prisons, as CON pointed out, which you dropped completely.
When you said:
"Second of all, death penalty cases have a long and lengthy appeal process, which can bring trauma to both the accused’s and victim’s family. Far from bringing peace and closure, this process, which can take several decades, only opens old wounds."
In your R1.
And here:
"Reversed. The death penalty does not bring closure to a victim’s family; instead, it does the opposite. Death penalty cases have a long and lengthy appeals process to minimize innocent convictions. This process can take several decades. These are several decades in which the victim’s family has to relive the trauma over and over again."
You then quote a judge that wished she didn't hand out death penalties because of the many retrials that followed which caused trauma for the families as an argument for LWOP, which doesn't have these extra trials.
To me it seemed pretty clear you were against the idea of additional trials to prevent death penalties from being given out willy nilly. In fact it really seemed like you believed that LWOP is better precisely because it DOESN'T have extra trials.
I have voted. Both sides brought up great points, but the debate really devolved by the time R4 showed up.