The Instigator
MasturDbtor
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Ore_Ele
Con (against)
Winning
32 Points

As Long As Abortion Is Legal We Should Feed Aborted Fetuses to the World's Poor

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 7 votes the winner is...
Ore_Ele
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/23/2010 Category: Politics
Updated: 6 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,801 times Debate No: 14121
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (49)
Votes (7)

 

MasturDbtor

Pro

As long as abortion is allowed we should not let the dead fetuses go to waste.

There are many starving, hungry people in the world. According to the Alan Guttmacher Institute 126,000 abortions are performed daily.
http://www.abortionno.org...

16,000 people die every day from starvation. Not only are 126,000 fetuses good enough to save everyone from world hunger, but also to keep people adequately fed.
http://wiki.answers.com...

Just like with other meats fetuses can be sent to factories, ground up, and inspected for quality control before being shipped out.

Unlike other meats I do not propose turning this into a commercial enterprise, but instead having the government run this as a charity program to end world hunger. Although since there are only 16,000 people who die of starvation a day the extra fetuses can be sold in stores in order to pay off the program's expenses so taxes do not have to be raised for it, and may even give the government a profit, alleviating the national debt.
Ore_Ele

Con

I would like to thank my opponent for this interesting topic and their dedication to their arguement.

My opponent makes some interesting claims, 16,000 people that starve to death each day. While this fact it true, it is important to note that this fact is a global fact, and the vast majority of those that starve to death are from extremely poor nations, which are often war torn. While the majority of abortions are performed in developed nations, where we have the extensive medical capibilities to have safe abortions. We then must consider that there would be a massive cost to transporting the abortion food to the starving, which they likely can't afford, or they wouldn't be starving.

Another issue that we find, is that abortions happen at different stages of pregnancy, and so the fetuses can come in a wide veriety of sizes. If they are not all the same size, then the machinery to process them has to have additional features, which can cost additional money. Adding more to the cost.

Fetuses can hardly be classified the same as "meet" since they are not fully developed, they are more like a shelless egg. They have much more delicate bodies and a grow person (or grown animal) and so must be handled with additional care (which adds costs).

My opponent suggests that the remaining fetus food can be sold to people to offset the costs of feeding the hungry. Unfortunately, I don't have any recent survey data, however I'll guess that most people will choose to pass over the fetus food for something else. And considering that they are off setting the costs of others, that only raises their costs, making it even easier to just say no.

A far wiser use of aborted fetuses then fetus food, is for stem cell research. This research can help find cures for diseases that currently plague our lives, such as cancer and AIDS, along with spinal and brain damage. These benefits can provide their own income as medicine and procedures are done. That money, can then be used to off set the costs of sending REAL food to the starving, which would ultimately be cheaper, healthier, and more humane, then feeding them fetus food.

Thank you

http://stemcells.nih.gov...
Debate Round No. 1
MasturDbtor

Pro

"We then must consider that there would be a massive cost to transporting the abortion food to the starving, which they likely can't afford, or they wouldn't be starving."

Whether or not they can afford it is irrelevant. We're talking about "charity". They don't have to pay a penny.

"Another issue that we find, is that abortions happen at different stages of pregnancy, and so the fetuses can come in a wide veriety of sizes. If they are not all the same size, then the machinery to process them has to have additional features, which can cost additional money. Adding more to the cost."

The same can be said of other animals that are processed for their meats. They are not all the same size either. For example, cows. Some cows are heavier or taller, but they are still able to build machinery for processing them. Considering that a fetus is quite smaller than a cow the machinery would likewise be smaller, and so would likely cost less to build than the machinery used to process cows.

"My opponent suggests that the remaining fetus food can be sold to people to offset the costs of feeding the hungry. Unfortunately, I don't have any recent survey data, however I'll guess that most people will choose to pass over the fetus food for something else. And considering that they are off setting the costs of others, that only raises their costs, making it even easier to just say no."

Considering there are only 126,000 fetuses a day this only requires a small market of consumers. Some people get drawn into things by the allure of the forbidden. Even though this will be legal it will still have the allure of the forbidden, because its essentially "human meat" and that is considered taboo. Still some people will want to try it out of curiosity, and some of those people will like how it tastes. Only a very tiny portion of the world population has to actually be interested in eating fetus to be able to sell it.

"A far wiser use of aborted fetuses then fetus food, is for stem cell research."

The problem here is that by the time an abortion is performed much of the fetus has already developed. That is to say many of those "stem cells" have turned into regular cells that would be useless in stem cell research. A much wiser use of stem cell research would be to look at embryos that weren't used at IVF clinics. Embryos have plenty of stem cells. Fetuses have already begun developing their organs.

"This research can help find cures for diseases that currently plague our lives, such as cancer and AIDS, along with spinal and brain damage. These benefits can provide their own income as medicine and procedures are done. That money, can then be used to off set the costs of sending REAL food to the starving"

The problem with this argument is it takes too much time. My solution can be put to work right away. We have no idea how long stem cell research is going to take. As for the "income" received how are we to make sure that income(which would go to the doctors performing the procedures) goes to sending food to the starving? The only way I can think of is a tax increase and voters are unlikely to find that very palatable.

Furthermore, when we already have enough stem cells in embryos sitting in IVF clinics throughout the country and can have adequate stem cell research this way why not use aborted fetuses to take care of another problem, World Hunger.

VOTE PRO and together we can end world hunger.
Ore_Ele

Con

"Whether or not they can afford it is irrelevant. We're talking about "charity". They don't have to pay a penny."

In which case, there is still a cost that we must pay. And it is still cheaper to provide them with healthier food that will ultimately be better for them.

"The same can be said of other animals that are processed for their meats. They are not all the same size either. For example, cows. Some cows are heavier or taller, but they are still able to build machinery for processing them. Considering that a fetus is quite smaller than a cow the machinery would likewise be smaller, and so would likely cost less to build than the machinery used to process cows."

Cows and chickens are grown to be as similar as possible, to minimize the cost. Aborted babies to not have that same luxury. You are also making the fallacy that smaller = cheaper, which is not true. less complex = cheaper. The more complicated something is, the more it will cost.

"Considering there are only 126,000 fetuses a day this only requires a small market of consumers. Some people get drawn into things by the allure of the forbidden. Even though this will be legal it will still have the allure of the forbidden, because its essentially "human meat" and that is considered taboo. Still some people will want to try it out of curiosity, and some of those people will like how it tastes. Only a very tiny portion of the world population has to actually be interested in eating fetus to be able to sell it."

Another mistake, there are not 126,000 fetuses aborted, there are 126,000 pregnancies aborted, most of them happen to be embryos. And 88% happen in the first trimester. Meaning that most of the abortions, the baby is less then 1/2 oz.

A single meal would require about 10 aborted pregnancies, and so the numbers would not add up to save world hunger. Considering a single cow could provide more meet then 10,000 abortions. The costs just make it meaningless.

"Furthermore, when we already have enough stem cells in embryos sitting in IVF clinics throughout the country and can have adequate stem cell research this way why not use aborted fetuses to take care of another problem, World Hunger."

Who is to say that we already have enough? When it comes to researching the cures to some of the most deadly diseases, every bit extra helps. 10 scientists working on it is great, but 20 is better, and 30 even better, and they will all need material.

With so little meet on the fetus food, the difficulties of transporting to the hungry and overall cost never being fully addressed by my opponent, there is no reason to send them fetus food, since other food options are safer and cheaper. A better option might be feeding the dead, since they'll have more meet on them, but that would be a different discussion.

Thank you all, vote CON.

http://www.prochoice.org...
Debate Round No. 2
49 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by xXCryptoXx 3 years ago
xXCryptoXx
This is the most messed up debate...
Posted by sadolite 5 years ago
sadolite
"How sick to even CONSIDER eating fetuses! How morbid and inhumane!"

But sucking them out of a woman's womb with a vacuum cleaner and killing them is somehow perfectly acceptable. Go figure?
Posted by zak61099 5 years ago
zak61099
How sick to even CONSIDER eating fetuses! How morbid and inhumane!
Posted by Dmetal 6 years ago
Dmetal
Anyone else kinda hungry after reading this?:)
Posted by sadolite 6 years ago
sadolite
Again, you keep fixating on trying to narrow it down to a specific flavor. The flavor is irrelevant. What is relevant is that you eat it and not know it is made of human fetuses. Weather or not you think it resembles the flavor of pork chicken or what ever meat you can think of does not matter. The only thing that matters is that it is palatable and that you don't know it is made from human fetus from its flavor. The flavor does not matter, what matters is if you eat it and think the flavor is acceptable regardless of what meat group it may taste like.
Posted by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
I love this debate! Also, I am not seriously advocating that you take meds. It was a joke, a bad one, but a joke nonetheless.
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
You said that people wouldn't be able to taste the difference. That is a far cry from simply being palatable.
Posted by sadolite 6 years ago
sadolite
You still completely miss the point of "any kind of meat can be made palatable" Going on and on about the differences in flavor is pointless.
Posted by Ore_Ele 6 years ago
Ore_Ele
I actually don't eat eggs. But do chicken eggs taste anything like real chicken? So it makes sense that human embryos do not taste like humans.
Posted by sadolite 6 years ago
sadolite
Calling ones sanity into question is the most often used tactic in almost all debates next to name calling. It is used to marginalize the opposing point of view without having to defend ones own point of view. Infintile bush league bull crap.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by gavin.ogden 6 years ago
gavin.ogden
MasturDbtorOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by RougeFox 6 years ago
RougeFox
MasturDbtorOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Cobo 6 years ago
Cobo
MasturDbtorOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by rogue 6 years ago
rogue
MasturDbtorOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Cunit0814 6 years ago
Cunit0814
MasturDbtorOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by SuperRobotWars 6 years ago
SuperRobotWars
MasturDbtorOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by alpaca 6 years ago
alpaca
MasturDbtorOre_EleTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05