The Instigator
Masterful
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
factandevidence1234
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points

Dead babies should become a form of currency.

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 7/11/2018 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 2 months ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,169 times Debate No: 116432
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (61)
Votes (0)

 

Masterful

Pro

I propose before you today, that we should begin using dead babies as a form of currency.

Dead babies would make a good form of currency due to the fact that a babies corpse would eventually rot. This would encourage spending and thus stimulate the economy, creating new business opportunities and increasing employment.
Babies are renewable and can be made by anyone, which in turn, would create equality of wealth among the currently divided social classes.

One may also wish to use this as an opportunity to enact ethnic purging, which is normally desirable, less one desires marauding bands of black men raping and pillaging the local white neighborhoods.
White babies would be worth the least amount, while African and Muslim babies would fetch a hefty price. This means more people would be killing black and Muslim babies, thus reducing their populations.
Due to their population being reduced, we would experience various societal changes such as, lower crimes rates, lower poverty rates and cleaner air.

As you can see using dead babies as a form of currency is not only economically stimulating, but allows us to push other, more malicious agendas in an attempt to end barbarism and savagery.

Nigg on my friends.
factandevidence1234

Con

Masterful, you are a racist fool, like it or not. It's inhumane to kill babies and not to mention disgusting. However since I'm debating on the stupidest thing ever, I will address your idea. Using dead babies as currency would result in extinction. You'd be killing babies who'd be the next generation, and then there would be nobody to create more babies, thus leading to mass extinction. As I've said before what about the savage whites? You are the most racist freak ever. It is not economically stimulating as there would be no economy to be stimulated.
Debate Round No. 1
Masterful

Pro

Humans have been used as a form of currency for 1000s of years, even still to this day they're used in the form of slaves.
Slavery, while regarded as morally inhumane, has yielded many wonders and constructs of today, such as America. Such wonders would otherwise not have been made and have made life easier for everyone. Due to aiding the construction of America, one can say that slavery has aided the well being of man kind and millions of people. Thus slavery is good in some context.

This brings me to my next point. Considering there, as demonstrated above, is a context where slavery yields positive results, is it unreasonable to assume that dead babies can yield positive results? Let's look into that.
Where legally permitted, mothers commit abortions all over the world as if they're having their morning coffee, they don't think twice about killing a baby and see abortion as morally ethical. It's also a statistical fact that women kill more babies than men through their infanticide violence. [A]

Considering women are the biggest killers of children in the known world, how is it that a woman stands before me today, defiantly and so self righteously telling me that I can't use a babies corpse as currency? Wouldn't that seem almost, hypocritical? I would urge my opponent to cease THEIR statistical violent tendencies, before criticising mine.

Using babies as currency would allow for us to take a eugenics approach to reproduction. One can now trade any babies with poor traits, leaving only the most healthy and beautiful babies to survive. This would mean children whom do survive, are good looking and live happy and healthy lives.
I would ask my opponent, why are you denying babies their right to a healthy and happy life? Are you morally coherent?

I expect my opponent to touch upon all points and answer all questions or else my opponent must forfeit in typical female fashion.

[A] https://www.childtrends.org...
factandevidence1234

Con

1. "Humans have been used as currency for 1,000s of years." First of all, that doesn't mean it's good, second of all, LIVE HUMANS, who in most cases are partially or fully matured.
2. "Slavery while regarded morally inhumane, has yeilded many wonders and constructs of today." Well, if they were going to
yeild many "wonders", as you say, couldn't people at least be ethical and pay their workers?
3. "Where legally permitted, mothers kill babies all over the world." Yeah sure, they kill their babies for money. And if you think that they don't think twice, I feel sorry for you. OF COURSE THEY THINK TWICE. Would you just kill your baby without thinking?! That would make you very stupid and unethical. Women most likely do abortion because they have been raped or sexually horrassed. They don't just kill their babies because they feel like it. I'm sorry if as a man you can't understand that.
"Only good looking babies would survive." Really, can you hear yourself? That's discrimination, and unethical. The majority of the worlds babies don't actually survive birth, and then you add that to killing babies which are poor looking??? That's about 90% of the world you're taking away buddy.
My points still stand: Mass extinction, savage whites.
Debate Round No. 2
Masterful

Pro


Con seems to believe I advocate slavery, I do not advocate slavery. I have only pointed out that slavery has had a permanent positive effect on mankind, such as the construction of wonders. While only resulting in a short term negative effect, being the low quality lives of the slaves involved.

The same would be true for using dead babies as currency, the truth is, babies have not reached the stage known as person-hood, where they develop neurological functions that allow them to be biologically classified as a person. Such neurological functions include a distinct personality, the ability to reason or use logic and the ability to empathise with other human beings in any manner.
Due to not having met person-hood, one can declare babies to be non-people and therefore a disposable resource to either, be use for creating a person, or to be used as currency in order to stimulate the economy and attempt to close the societal difference between the lower and middle class.

Obviously the premise behind using dead babies rather than money, is because this will take financial power away from large government and give it to the people, due to the people generating the currency. The truth is, money is worthless and could be replaced with anything, the one common and sustainable thing that people can create, is babies.

Inflation will not occur due to the 9 month pregnancy period that will make generating babies a slow one and of course the corpse will rot away, this means for any large scale storage of currency, people will have to use banks with industrial freezers. Such freezers would be too expensive for the ordinary person to own on a large scale, meaning various black markets, such as drug rings will not be able to store large sums of this currency and will be forced to use banks, allowing for easy identification by local authorities. This is called "The no more money under mattress effect" and will also help circulate wealth.

It will also encourage men and women to come together and procreate, strengthening social bonds thus leading to more sex overall. While it's true that a large portion of the newborn population will be culled for currency, the maternal instincts of mothers and the increased rate at which they are now giving birth, will ensure the mothers desire to keep some of their babies and in turn, will increase the population. This will also allow for defects to be removed from the gene pool.

I urge my opponent to stop being so closed minded and consider the possibilities of accepting change.


Djksp has been banned from voting due to being a vote spammer
factandevidence1234

Con

Actually, if it weren't for slavery, the civil war wouldn't have happened.
1." Inflation will not occur due to the 9 month pregnancy period that will make generating babies a slow one and of course the corpse will rot away, this means for any large scale storage of currency, people will have to use banks with industrial freezers. Such freezers would be too expensive for the ordinary person to own on a large scale, meaning various black markets, such as drug rings will not be able to store large sums of this currency and will be forced to use banks, allowing for easy identification by local authorities. This is called "The no more money under mattress effect" and will also help circulate wealth." Not true. If the black markets are making enough money from drugged people, they will always have enough money to afford those freezers. Not to mention the freezers are adding unnecessary taxes to the economy, which would actually make a MUCH larger government.
2. "It will also encourage men and women to come together and procreate, strengthening social bonds thus leading to more sex overall. While it's true that a large portion of the newborn population will be culled for currency, the maternal instincts of mothers and the increased rate at which they are now giving birth, will ensure the mothers desire to keep some of their babies and in turn, will increase the population. This will also allow for defects to be removed from the gene pool." It would also lead to more raping and abuse, when a man wants money. If the babies are money, they won't want to keep them and rather, get rich.
3. "I urge my opponent to stop being so closed minded and consider the possibilities of accepting change." I'm not being close minded, I'm just pointing out that this is the most unethical way of doing things.
Debate Round No. 3
61 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by asta 4 days ago
asta
"Women most likely do abortion because they have been raped or sexually horrassed. ". About 1 percent of abortions are due to rape.

Masterful did bring up an interesting point with being pro choice and being against it. Although I am pro life and I am against using dead babies as cash, I think Pro choicers are being hypocritical unless they support it, Which would be barbaric.
Posted by mosc 1 month ago
mosc
Grind up living Nazi lovers and sell off there body parts. Start by making lamp shades from Nazi lovers skins and soap from these sub humans body fats. Extract all gold found in the teeth of these sub human less than animals. The aim, To treat all Nazi lovers as the sub humans of Dresden, Together with their family and friends.

The obvious first step, Place all sub human Nazi lovers together with their families and friends into Concentration camps and slave labor. Give them a starvation diet and beat them till these vile pigs none human beings die off unto extinction.
Posted by factandevidence1234 2 months ago
factandevidence1234
Ok. I get what you're saying.
Posted by What50 2 months ago
What50
I mean it's factual, you use a lot of emotional appeal into your arguments and barley any logical arguments that could counter Masterfuls argument. I think the problem is here is that you are looking at it through one angle. If I was debating against masterful I would say that pregnant women have to eat and drink more, making this currency not infinite due to our food supplies and water supplies. You could also refute the point of the blackmarket argument saying that organizations such as the cartel already has a lot of power and can just steal or buy a industrial freezer. There is an a argument to the baby rotting argument. You could counter that by saying that due to the babys rotting people are not able to save thus making them only get the affordable items.
Posted by factandevidence1234 2 months ago
factandevidence1234
Rightttt... ok
Posted by Masterful 2 months ago
Masterful
Calm down, there is no need to get emotional
Posted by factandevidence1234 2 months ago
factandevidence1234
You can't judge me if you don't know who I am, or what I've been through. That's ignorant.
Posted by Masterful 2 months ago
Masterful
+1
I would suggest changing your name to Fatandemotional1234
Posted by What50 2 months ago
What50
I mean it is reasonable. For a person who has the title facts and evidence, you use a lot of emotion for your argument.
Posted by factandevidence1234 2 months ago
factandevidence1234
ugh, has your mind really gone THAT backwards?!
No votes have been placed for this debate.