The Instigator
MissMissy21
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
dianacpc516
Con (against)
Winning
3 Points

Is Medea guilty of committing infanticide

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 1 vote the winner is...
dianacpc516
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/16/2012 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 4 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 2,103 times Debate No: 28301
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (1)

 

MissMissy21

Pro

I begin my argument that Medea is guilty of committing infanticide because she admits to wanting to kill her children. She speaks to herself weighing the possibility of killing her children in order to seek revenge on her ex-husband. She states "Do I want to make myself ridiculous, letting my enemies go unpunished? I must go through with this." clearly speaking of killing her children for the reason of revenge against her husband. She also states "If there is anyone who should not be present at my sacrifice, that will be up to them. I shall not weaken my hand. She shows no concern or remorse for the children and seems very determined in committing infanticide.
dianacpc516

Con

When she states, "Do I want to make myself ridiculous, letting my enemies go unpunished? I must go through with this.", she is stating that she wants revenge on her former husband Jason. It is something she MUST do. She does not want to be made a fool of. Madea helped Jason by using her magic to complete tasks to gain the golden fleece, which he does. She helped him out of love. He then leaves Madea for King Creon's daughter to gain fortune. He betrayed her. Madea knows that the only revenge that would really affect Jason would be the death of his children.She has pride and she is full of passionate anger, she had to hurt him in a way that he would never forget her. On page 112 in the comments section it states, " Nothing less than this will punish Jason for what he has done."
Debate Round No. 1
MissMissy21

Pro

While she was betrayed by her husband and has every right to be angry with him there is no liable reason for her to murder her children. Her children are innocent in this how ordeal and do not deserve to be punished because of their fathers betrayal. She states that she know what she is doing is wrong and unforgivable but she goes through with it regardless of consequences. She is guilty of the murder of her children and should not be exempt because her marriage failed. She can use magic to obtain the golden fleece she could use magic to seek revenge while leaving the children out of it.
dianacpc516

Con

Madea found a way to make Jason feel completely damaged. He would have grief for the rest of his life. She was overpowered by her pride, by her fury and because of that she did what she thought was necessary and if it was necessary to get revenge on Jason, to kill their children, then it was what she had to do. she states that, "I am overcome by troubles." It is something beyond her. If a soldier had to kill for his country there wouldn't be question about it. He stands his ground and does what is necessary and what in his mind is best for the country, And in her mind killing her children was best.
Debate Round No. 2
MissMissy21

Pro

A soldier is defending a nation against a threat. Medea's children are no threat to Jason or to her. They are a reminder that she has failed. They remind her she wasn't good enough for Jason and that he used her for her magic. She feels used and rejected and she refuses to me reminded of that when she looks into their eyes and holds there hands. The revenge against Jason is a solution to her anger but the loss of the reminder of her failure is nothing more than selfish satisfaction of her failures. She already killed Jason's uncle she then kills the King and his daughter. isn't there enough blood shed already on her hands. she is no longer seeking revenge she is doing this for he own good and is showing the she will continue to kill innocent lives until she feel for filled. her children may not be the last of the blood shed.
dianacpc516

Con

But what can be considered a threat to a nation? , yes that can include bomb threats, but there are situations in which the leader of a country is in a position in which others oppose. The soldiers who enlisted in fighting for their country must stand behind their decision in being a part of the army and listening to orders. This is what Madea did, she made her decision and stood behind it. This would make Jason the one who failed, or "lost". He failed at being a faithful husband and father, to go after the king"s daughter for money. He was being selfish and because of this he ended up with nothing. He "bit off more than he could chew." Again he made her suffer and she returned the pain. In book II on "What is emotion" by Seneca he states, "Anger, however, must not only be set in motion: it has to break out, since it is an impulse." She killed her children out of impulse.
Debate Round No. 3
MissMissy21

Pro

You claim she killed her children from impulse yet synonyms for impulse are spur, thought, whim, wish, desire and spontaneity; none of these including an impulse require pre-thought. Medea thought and debated the challenge of killing her children. she was not impulsive she was premeditated, thoughtful and conscience of her actions. she know what she is going to do, she debated it through out the play. she made her decisions knowing it was wrong she states "I know that what I am about to do is bad, but anger is master of my plans, which is the source of the greatest troubles for humankind". She is clearly stating that she knows this is wrong and shouldn't be done, she admits to being in the wrong mind set and tries to blame her decision on anger and the power it has over her. but by admitting she has knowledge of this she she saying she could stop it but the desire she has to for fill her revenge is much great to her then the lives of her children. you may claim the anger was impulsive and it must break out once set in motion, but she set the anger in motion herself by allowing the single thought of harming children into her mind. she is allowing the power of pride over come the power of love for her children.
dianacpc516

Con

She does state, "I know that what I am about to do is bad, but anger is master of my plans, which is the source of the greatest troubles for humankind" but within the phrase she states that her anger is the master of her plans. Anger which is her impulse, which is controlling her reasoning and action. Once one reaches a certain state of anger their mind does not correspond with their actions. Seneca states, in Book II "What is an Emotion", "Anger is a motion which outleaps reason and drags it along." He also states the phases in which emotions begin, grow or get carried away. Seneca states that the first movement is involuntary, the next is voluntary but not insistent and the third really is out of control; wanting retribution not just "if it is right" but at all costs, it has completely overcome the reason. In Madea's case, she has gone to the third phase in which her anger got out of HER control. She wanted vengeance at all costs and because of this she did not have reason. Since she did not have reason, she did not have control and because of this, her children's lives were taken away not by her, but by her anger towards her unfaithful and selfish husband, Jason.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by imabench 4 years ago
imabench
MissMissy21dianacpc516Tied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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: Just because something happens in a movie it doesnt mean it has any connection to any events in real life, and pro failed to prove that was the case. Arguments go to the con.