The Instigator
Raperights
Pro (for)
Winning
17 Points
The Contender
Minnesotan
Con (against)
Losing
12 Points

Raepd women should be euthanized

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 7 votes the winner is...
Raperights
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 6/30/2014 Category: Politics
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 3,855 times Debate No: 58362
Debate Rounds (5)
Comments (65)
Votes (7)

 

Raperights

Pro

Motion: Raped women should be euthanized.

Rape is happening everywhere. It is occurring even at this time as I am writing this argument and as you are reading it. Rape is no longer something strange or unique in terms of its frequency; rather, it is an everyday, ordinary event that people from all over the world participate in.

The motion as stated above is very simple and clear-cut. It seems unlikely that the motion will be misinterpreted or misunderstood. Yes, it proposes that raped women should be mercy-killed.

It is well-known that raped women suffer from a high level of emotional damage and psychological trauma after they receive rape. The effect of their post-rape trauma lasts throughout their lifetime without a high possibility of being completely eradicated as long as they are alive. The impacts of their rape may be demonstrated in various forms, such as nightmare, depression, instability, insomnia and/or suicidal thoughts.

There really can be no effective help for those women who have to undergo perpetual psychological pain as long as they are alive. No amount of counselling or medication can actually put them out of their misery. Indeed, many futile attempts, most of them verbal, have been made in order to soothe these women, yet no amount of words could ever make them "un-raped". The history of their unique rape can never be undone; it rigidly remains inside their physique and psyche, calling them gently whenever these women try to get over their rape.

It is indeed inhumane for any member of society to pressure or recommend these women to continue their life. Doing so just conveys one grossly inhumane and despicably immoral message: Please keep being alive and continue living with your doomed misery regardless of how much pain you have to endure because of it. This is the more misogynistic and psychopathic thing to say and do to raped women. Not only wishing but also helping someone to sustain a life of endless torment is already a clear sign of psychopathy. Wishing raped women to continue to suffer from the aftermath of their rape is a contemptible demonstration of the worst kind of misogyny. Those who advise or "support" the raped women to carry on with their lives are purely evil workers who are just like torturers that do not want their victims to die. Those "rape support" members and torturers just one essential aspect in common: they want whom they deal with to continue to survive, so that they can get the pleasure of prolonging their victim's hopeless misery a bit more. Unforgivable in every moral standard.

However, there is hope. There is something meaningful that we, as decent citizens of moral and civilized society, can do to and for these raped women. That's the proposal stated in the motion of this debate. Euthanize those raped women, unless they commit suicide. We have the responsibility as working citizens to support happiness of others when they have it, and we also have the duty to save others from the irrecoverable catastrophe they are forever stuck in. We now have the technology, the money, the community spirit and, most importantly, the humane emotion of wanting to help the raped women to get out of their psychological mess. Unlike misogynistic psychopaths who want these women to suffer, we have decency and ability to put these females out of their misery for their own good.

It is now the time to really help raped women.
Minnesotan

Con

By your argument, since women suffer from PTD, all men and children who are also raped should be euthanized, shouldn't they? Just because men are a different gender, doesn't mean that they won't suffer from post-traumatic disorder. Also, women are needed for continuing the future of the human race, for every women you kill, you kill a child, and you kill his/her ancestors, therefore, you kill a entire lineage of people.
Debate Round No. 1
Raperights

Pro

Hello, Minnesotan. Welcome to this debate.

You are missing the point by employing the fallacy of a straw man. While there are other types of rape, such as men or children getting raped with the aftereffect of PTDS, the point of this debate is focused on the category of raped women. Please make a necessary distinction and refrain from bringing up irrelevance.

Your argument that women are needed for "continuing the future of the human race" shows that you regard women as instruments that are required just for making babies, as if they were factories of babies, a conception which implies that unraped women are not human beings. Strong woman-hating attitude and dehumanization of unraped women is implied in this proposition of yours. Notice the "unraped women" as distinguished from "raped women". The difference between the two will be clarified below in this argument when the features of raped women will be highlighted.

"for every women you kill, you kill a child, and you kill his/her ancestors, therefore, you kill a entire lineage of people." - The last part of your argument. Killing a woman is killing a woman, not anybody else. Again, you fail to make a necessary distinction crucial to the analysis of an event, and instead you just conflate irrelevances into one mess of your rebuttal.

Indeed it would be easy to imagine that raped women would likely refuse to be euthanized. However, their state of mind at the time of their expressing such dissent must be taken into account. Due to the traumatic effect raped women experience, their post-rape psychological state puts them in a position of being unable to make a conscious, rational choice. They are quite "out of their mind" and the opinions of such people are of no relevance; it is simply irrational to believe things told by someone whose consciousness is in a deplorable condition - just like we do not take what drunk people say seriously. The same principle applies to raped women. Hence, it is necessary for us to disregard when raped women express they do not wish to be euthanized since they simply do not know what they are saying.

Another possible objection is that euthanasia is a form of murder - killing a human being. This is a vastly conservative notion that fails to comprehend the liberal idea of euthanasia at all. A debate on euthanasia will clarify this position.

Besides all the psychological damages, rape has been frequently referred to as "a murder of a soul". What this means is that the soul of raped women has been killed upon them receiving rape, which means that raped women no longer hold a soul inside them. So here comes the essential question: Are raped women human beings after they lose their soul? The answer is rather simple and clear: No. A genuine and proper human is considered to hold both a physical form and a spiritual form. One is not a human being without a soul; it is nothing but a semblance of a human being with inner emptiness. The lack of soul and rationality, both of which are crucial features that make up a human being, justifies the position that raped women do not belong to the category of any type of "humanity" whatsoever. Thus, raped women are not humans, and from this follows that human rights, which are only applicable to human beings, do not apply to raped women.

So raped women are not humans, but yet they are still automatically active in a way. What are they then? The answer is that they belong to a category of a nonhuman animal. And it is not at all a serious matter to cull animals.
Minnesotan

Con

In this case, we must define the definition of "rape". Rape can be classified as penetrating a women, or it can simply be classified by touching or hitting.

I never implicated that women were required just for making babies. I said that is one of their uses, but I never said that it was their only use. Please stop putting words in my mouth.

As for your argument that the dissent of raped women should be disregarded, I don't think asking them if they wish to be killed is a good way to relieve some of their trauma. Of course they will suffer from some trauma, and of course they might be incoherent. However, after a day or two, most cases will be at least able to provide a clear, one-word answer to the question of euthanasia.

Also, another point I would like to bring up is that euthanasia is illegal in all countries with the exception of Belgium, Luxembourg, and the Netherlands. In this case, any form of euthanasia is considered murder unless you live in those three countries.

Also, "A murder of a soul" is only possible if a soul exists, but since I don't want to get into a debate within a debate, I will just say this: How does anyone know for sure that a woman loses her soul if she is raped? Can we sense when a soul is lost? If we do not know for sure that a raped woman loses her soul, then she cannot be considered an animal, therefore, she is still considered a human, and retains her human rights.

Raped women cannot be considered non-human, and when you say that culling animals is not a big deal, that is just a matter of opinion.
Debate Round No. 2
Raperights

Pro

Good point. The definition of rape in this debate is "an activity that involves physical virginal, oral and/or anal penetration on a female's body by a male using his penis, regardless of or in spite of the female's lack of dissent or refusal."

The state of mind of raped women renders them impossible to make a clear, one-answer question to the question of being euthanized at all. It hardly matters how many days pass by after their rape, since the effect of the event and their trauma remains for a very long time. Ask a raped woman about their rape experience, and the majority of them will go awfully berserk just at the mention of it or their recollection of it, no matter how past it became. Euthanizing them will put them to eternal rest where they no longer have to experience their psychological pain.

The current law regarding euthanasia does not reflect any progressive viewpoint that can be helpful to raped women. Instead, it just facilitates an environment where raped women are forced to suffer from their trauma without any fundamental solution to it. If the law is wrong, it should be changed. In history, there have already been many times where faulty laws have been discarded or amended - the same can be done for the euthanization of raped women.

The "soul of murder" was brought up by people who claim to provide "support" or "counseling" for those raped women or research rape. I myself do not know what methods they use to judge the murder of soul of raped women, but we can be sure that those rape-help supporters or researchers, who closely work with those rapd women, are quite knowledgeable when they state that rape kills the soul. Based on that, we can establish that raped women do not have a soul, and since a human being without a soul is not at all considered in any common sense to be a human. We have seen, albeit only in fictions, the "people" without soul - they are called zombies. It is just flatly risible to argue that zombies are entitled to human rights.

One of the universally accepted truths is that it is OK to cull animals. While vegetarians may oppose this idea and activity altogether, they constitute a minority in this world and thus can be disregarded. Moreover, culling raped women is more than just merely culling animals. Their euthanization provides them a meaningful exit from their everlasting torment and to the place where they can rest peacefully. It is for the good of the raped women. And if you believe that raped women still retain their soul after their rape as a human being, euthanizing them still adheres to the ethical treatment of humanity by respecting their rights to escape from pain.
Minnesotan

Con

Minnesotan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
Raperights

Pro

Please visit the comment section of this debate for further debate. Anyone is welcome.
Minnesotan

Con

Minnesotan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
Raperights

Pro

It looks like that the Con has forfeited this debate. However, you are all welcome to join the comment section for your own opinions. Thank you, and have a nice rape.
Minnesotan

Con

Minnesotan forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 5
65 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by Raperights 2 years ago
Raperights
@MasturDbtor

You wish I was trolling.
Posted by MasturDbtor 2 years ago
MasturDbtor
Obvious troll is obvious.
Posted by Raperights 2 years ago
Raperights
@UndeniableReality

Yes you are.
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
Those aren't the people I'm referring to.
Posted by Raperights 2 years ago
Raperights
@UndeniableReality Indeed raped females should be euthanized.
Posted by UndeniableReality 2 years ago
UndeniableReality
This debate has forced me to consider that maybe some individuals should indeed be euthanized...
Posted by Raperights 2 years ago
Raperights
Burning snow,

Please be mindful of your manners. Also, please refrain from making baseless accusations.

My position supporting the euthanization of raped females is undoubtedly a feminist one in that it seeks to save those suffering from their everlasting agony and putting them to eternal : and comfort. Those who oppose this position are genuinely mysoginistic psychopaths for they want to prolong those women's excruciating pain and misery.

I never mentioned about torture. Please refrain from committing the fallacy of strawman.

Your lack of any sound or valid reasoning shown in your response proves that you are not human enough to present a worthwhile argument. However, If you still insist on having a debate with me, please feel free to do so.
Posted by Burningsnow 2 years ago
Burningsnow
Raper rights I would argue that you were a psychopath but we already know that.
The fact that your a misogynistic, stone cold believer in torture only cements that fact
and if you were to start any debate, even close to this with me I would simply outright beat you.
Posted by Raperights 2 years ago
Raperights
Hello, Preston. Thank you for your comment.

There are indeed many people in this world who suffer from abuse. However, this debate is about the psychological pain, agony and trauma experienced by raped women.

I am glad that raped women are burned alive. I am happy that raped women have their throat slit. I fully endorse any thoughtful and charitable activity that can save women from suffering tremendous misery for the rest of their lives.

Those children, indeed, may not easily deal with the fact that their mothers died that way. However, it is our social responsibility to educate those children and help them understand that it was for the good for their mothers that their mothers were euthanized following their rape. The children will understand it, although it may take some time.

This is not a joke.
Posted by Preston 2 years ago
Preston
they lost their soul? you should realize how many people suffer from abuse, how many women in india are burned alive, how many children lose their mothers, you, even if this is an insensitive joke, are a monster.
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by Wylted 2 years ago
Wylted
RaperightsMinnesotanTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeit
Vote Placed by Zarroette 2 years ago
Zarroette
RaperightsMinnesotanTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct to Pro for Con's round forfeits. I'm quite disgusted to see Pro win this debate, but he/she did still win it. Con's counter-arguments consisted of a strawman (as pointed out by Pro), a dodgy definition (which was corrected by Pro) and an overall decent 2nd round of arguments. However, Pro responded to all of them sufficiently, and whilst I don't agree with what he/she says, Con needed to respond and never did.
Vote Placed by kbub 2 years ago
kbub
RaperightsMinnesotanTied
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: I actually quite liked Pro's debate. It is obviously satirical, and like good satire reveals the profound problems of society--by making the absurd claim that raped women should be "mercy-killed," Pro emphasizes the truth that rape is a frequent, horrible, damaging offense that can never be undone. That being said, I recommend that Pro change her/his name. It gives a very bad impression. The fact that Con had difficulty defending that women should be allowed to be alive after rape was quite problematic, since this was Pro's satirical portion. Oh, and clever move Pro in suggesting Con was sexist by portraying women as mere baby-makers. I didn't buy your argument, but I thought it was a clever move all the same. Points to Pro for arguments and conduct due to forfeited rounds. ---- Pro has gone through great pains to assure me that her/his position is not satirical, that Pro sincerely believes raped women should be Euthanized. I'll correct my vote: arguments to Con, conduct to Con.---
Vote Placed by Burningsnow 2 years ago
Burningsnow
RaperightsMinnesotanTied
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 Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:14 
Reasons for voting decision: In my personal opinion their is no reason for this sexist BS, that in turn leads to the victim getting punished for the convicts troubles,this will only satisfy the convict and no one else. Most people can get over the fact that they were raped but most people can't get over being euthanized.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
RaperightsMinnesotanTied
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:40 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by SGM_iz_SekC 2 years ago
SGM_iz_SekC
RaperightsMinnesotanTied
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:13 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro's arguments were completely idiotic. The straw-man argument con made was enough to strike down pro's first round. Pro did not fulfill BoP, and therefor lost the arguments. Pro had slightly better conduct (ff).
Vote Placed by Phoenix61397 2 years ago
Phoenix61397
RaperightsMinnesotanTied
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:31 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro, unfortunately, gave much stronger arguments. They are not valid arguments, but were stronger than those of con. Though con forfeited, I still give conduct to them due to the nature of this debate.