The Instigator
mourishwaran
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Shadow4155
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Divorce should not be granted after child birth

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
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 4 votes the winner is...
Shadow4155
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 9/21/2013 Category: Miscellaneous
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,591 times Debate No: 37968
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (7)
Votes (4)

 

mourishwaran

Pro

Divorce should not be granted for couples after having babies. They should live together no matter what, Divorced Parents babies are mentally affected because of this.
Shadow4155

Con

I agree to the debate. I think Divorce SHOULD be allowed to be granted after child birth.

Since my opponent did not define "Divorce" I will. "The ending of a marriage by a legal process."

On to the debate, I think that they should have a choice. I think children would rather have their parents seperated, than to be fighting 24/7. You have provided no proof that ALL children are mentally affected by it.

My parents divorced when I was 12 years old, and I was fine with that, They are both happily married again.

I think ANYONE would rather have their parents happy than fighting 24/7

I hope my opponent has a good debate.
Debate Round No. 1
mourishwaran

Pro

If you have a problem with somebody you totally get rid of them, That is nonsense. If there is a nuclear bomb explosion in India people in america wont get affected, That does not justify that nuclear bomb is not dangerous.
Just because you are happy it does not mean all children will be that way.

Parents fighting with each other will surely turn around at a time, Children need parents guidance to live a good life, Please dont say you have a good life, i am talking about entire population of kids.
u get to know a lot of good things when you are around with your parents, Supervision is definitely required for Growing kids by their own parents.
MOTHERS LOVE & DADS CARE ARE ESSENTIAL for every kid in this world.

I am sure divorced parents will fight among them about who gets to keep the child. Parents might hate each other but they will definitely love their child.
Shadow4155

Con

My opponent has said "If you have a problem with somebody you totally get rid of them, That is nonsense. If there is a nuclear bomb explosion in India people in america wont get affected, That does not justify that nuclear bomb is not dangerous." Which I have no idea how this relates to divorce, but I will jut ignore it.

My opponent has also stated that "Parents fighting with each other will surely turn around at a time, Children need parents guidance to live a good life, Please dont say you have a good life, i am talking about entire population of kids."

Everyone knows that fights don't always solve, and that is will never turn around. The yelling, cussing, leaving that the parents do scars the kid more than the divorce. Also, The majority of kids would rather have their parents happy than having their parents fight and fight. I think its outrageous how you shrug off my argument by saying it isn't valid because of your opinion of "the entire population of kids."

My opponent also said "u get to know a lot of good things when you are around with your parents, Supervision is definitely required for Growing kids by their own parents." Yes, No one can argue that you can learn good things with your parents, I don't see where supervision comes in with divorce, so I will ignore that.

And the "I am sure divorced parents will fight among them about who gets to keep the child. Parents might hate each other but they will definitely love their child." Is not true, most parents after divorce are friends, they will love their child.

My oppenent ALSO makes the bold claim that ALL kids divorced are stuck with 1 parent, this is not true, not even CLOSE to true.



Debate Round No. 2
mourishwaran

Pro

Hey first i would like to state this, Please dont use the word my opponent often,.This so no court, its an online debate Just relax Dont go crazy saying my opponent makes bold claim and all those things with big fonts.

Back to the debate,
You said Fights dont always solve, You have never seen your parents fight.
What if somebody asks about your mother will you be proud to say "she is married to another person".

In your way of life Marriage is trial and error method. Marriage is something special.

If divorce is not given after child birth, People will be more carefull in chosing relationship and they will have less problems after marriage.

You are a child of divorced parent and you are supporting it, iam sure you will get marriedand after child birth you would gladly apply for divorce.
Family llife teaches you a lot things, Love,Affection,Obedience and most importantly responsibilities in life.

Shadow4155

Con

"You said Fights dont always solve, You have never seen your parents fight." I have seen parent's fight, to make an assumption like that without even knowing me is.. wierd.

Anyway, I don't think anyone would be embarassed saying their mom got married again, maybe just you because you might have grown up in some rural town, but anyway,

My opponent has made the claim that "In your way of life Marriage is trial and error method. Marriage is something special. "

I find that funny which you have never met me, and I have never said that, you are twisting my words into something that I did not say. ALSO, Marriage is special, but sometimes, it DOESN'T WORK OUT. Now, if you have been divorced 2 times or more, that is worry-some, but 1 time is ok.

Divorce is BETTER than parents fighting 24/7

"If divorce is not given after child birth, People will be more carefull in chosing relationship and they will have less problems after marriage. " People are careful, but you have to realize, NOT EVERYTHING IS MEANT TO BE. AND sometimes things don't work out.

"You are a child of divorced parent and you are supporting it, iam sure you will get marriedand after child birth you would gladly apply for divorce. "
Now you are making claims and assumptions about someone you have NEVER met, and saying how I would divorce anyone.
I can't believe how you would make that, YES I DO support my parent's divorce, as do LOTS of people.

Most people want their parent's to be happy than to fight 24/7

I'd like to thank my opponent for this debate, and hope him luck in his other ones.
Debate Round No. 3
7 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Posted by Condor117 3 years ago
Condor117
The con side sounds like a teenage, overconfident, arrogant jerk. But he did make the most compelling argument. But I do agree with the con side.
Posted by Abhishek.physics 3 years ago
Abhishek.physics
Its better to get divorced both for parents and kids, although it is quite difficult for a single divorced women to live in India.
Posted by TheEnergyHippo 3 years ago
TheEnergyHippo
I am 100% for Con. There are a lot of reasons for that. I was a kid. My mum devorced with my dad but I lived without a problem.
Posted by Dognip 3 years ago
Dognip
What if the parents are worse together than apart, it really depends on the people.
Posted by iSAT32196 3 years ago
iSAT32196
I agree with the "against". My parents divorced when I was 6 and my life has been fine. It just carried on.
Posted by Angelie 3 years ago
Angelie
I agree with the 'Against' POV. Children who were affected by their parents' divorce have often seen their parents feuding bitterly for years afterwards. A significant majority of divorcee children are physically and psychologically sound and go on to lead healthy lives. Also, what if one parent was abusive? If the parents stayed together, that would teach the child that it is okay to treat people badly and would damage the child much more than if the parents divorced.
Posted by leandro.sanchez 3 years ago
leandro.sanchez
i was not affected by it neitheir
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by thp078 3 years ago
thp078
mourishwaranShadow4155Tied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro really didn't offer any convincing arguments, whereas Con was able to refute everything he needed to. For making rude assumptions about the other, nobody gets better conduct.
Vote Placed by Skeptikitten 3 years ago
Skeptikitten
mourishwaranShadow4155Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: No sources were used, and neither party had particularly good grammar or spelling. Pro did not meet his burden of proof at all, and in fact just made a lot of claims he couldn't back up about divorce. He also made a great many assumptions about Con's position that were nowhere in evidence and a bit nonsensical.
Vote Placed by The_Master_Riddler 3 years ago
The_Master_Riddler
mourishwaranShadow4155Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct and Arguments for con due to the ridiculous counter argument stated about the nuclear bomb. The affirmative used a comparison that was completely out of line and illogical because 1.) there are better examples he could have used. 2) you usually dont KILL people in a divorce, which makes the example uncomparable, and 3.) you cant say something that is acceptable wrong and try to prove it by comparing it to something deemed morally wrong (nuclear war)
Vote Placed by funwiththoughts 3 years ago
funwiththoughts
mourishwaranShadow4155Tied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:04 
Reasons for voting decision: Con's arguments were more straightforward without nearly as many non-sequitur arguments as Pro had and he didn't make assumptions about Pro like Pro did about him, hence why he gets arguments and conduct.