The Instigator
Con (against)
7 Points
The Contender
Pro (for)
0 Points

Rapists should be able to sue their victims for custody and visitation rights of the child.

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 1 vote the winner is...
Voting Style: Open with Elo Restrictions Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/31/2014 Category: Philosophy
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,772 times Debate No: 55810
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (16)
Votes (1)




This is a topic I have seen discussed and debated quite often. I would now like to debate this here on

The first round is for acceptance, the second is for arguments, the third is for rebuttals, and the fourth is for counter-rebuttals and conclusions.

The rules are evident. Sources will be cited, proper spelling and grammar will be used, and there will be no forfeitures.

For clarification, this debate regards situations in which men rape women, not the other way around.

I look forward to this debate.


Hi all I am greatly looking forward to this debate today in which I propose we use simply the legal and logical arguments rather then using (a might I say logical fallacy) appeal to emotions. I agree with my opponents definition of the rules with one slight modification . This round should be run like a parliamentary debate and each of us must use proper argument structure. With all that aside I'm so glad my opponent has proposed this topic I have seen it debated before and greatly look forward to sharing my viewpoints and opinions. So thank you all voters/judges and may the best argument win!

Thank you all, and a have a wonderful day!
Debate Round No. 1



I would like to thank my opponent for accepting this debate. I would like to apologize that my arguments are short. My computer is slow, my browser tends to crash often, and I have limited time. There is a high possibility that I must forfeit the next round. I will be on vacation and will be extremely busy. Please keep that in mind. However, I will do what I can.

In order to establish common ground and make everything clear, I will provide two crucial definitions.

Sue - "to use a legal process by which you try to get a court of law to force a person, company, or organization that has treated you unfairly or hurt you in some way to give you something or to do something : to bring a lawsuit against someone or something" [1]

Rape – “to force (someone) to have sex with you by using violence or the threat of violence” [2]

Now that I have provided these definitions, I will commence my arguments.


Rape is sex forced upon someone else, perhaps using violence in the process. Rapists are criminals and they have surrendered some of their rights – free speech, right to bear arms, and others – to the law. Rape is a criminal offense with serious consequences. Why would that rapist deserve to visit and/or have custody of the child produced from that act? To me, it would be nonsensical. It would be best for both the child and the mother for the rapist to be out of their lives forever.

As rapists have yielded some of their rights, they cannot legally sue. They should not have that right. All the rapist will do is pay child support.

Whether it is prison, a fine, or community service, that rapist will need to endure the consequences for his wrongdoing. If the rapist were allowed to visit the child, that would not be healthy for the mother or the child. That would not serve the true cause: to make the rapist be aware of his error.

I believe I have made a good case against the notion that rapists should have visitation and custody rights of the child produced from that rape. My argument is limited due to limited time, but I did what I could. Please understand.

Works Cited
Because I have limited time and a limited argument, I have limited sources. Please do not count this against me. Thank you. I appreciate your understanding.



KatieKat99 forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2


I am on vacation ,yes, but I have found the time to write the following statement: That forfeiture is unacceptable. As there is no argument made by my opponent, I cannot refute anything.


I'm sorry I shouldn't have accepted this debate I'm in finals week
Debate Round No. 3


I see. Well, this debate was a failure. I urge the voters to consider my opponent's situation when voting. Either vote fairly or refrain from voting completely. Thank you.

Let's see how this continues.


Ok so my finals are done so i would gladly accept this debate from you again if you would be willing to try it, I find it quite an interesting topic and I"m fairly disappointed i didn"t get to actually debate this with you.
Debate Round No. 4
16 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by WilliamsP 3 years ago
I will post my argument later this evening.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
PM me to vote on this.
Posted by Dilara 3 years ago
There's a new law called Amanda and Jocelyn's law or something like that. Ariel Castro (who kidnapped 3 women and raped and tortured then for 10 years) fathered a child names Jocelyn with Amanda Berry. In court Castro the monster asked of he could see his daughter but was refused. This man denied three women their right to happiness for 10 years and he doesn't deserve the right to see his child. Someoen who rapes and hurts others for no good reason should not have any rights.
Posted by KatieKat99 3 years ago
If i accept this round can morality not be brought into the argument and we solely talk about the legality and ethicality of the resolution. I find this a very interesting topic but there is no way for anyone to argue the pro side if the morality of it is allowed to be discussed.
Posted by 9Dipity 3 years ago
Very interesting debate.
I'm not very aware of this subject but wouldn't the fact that the rapist would be in prison for the rape should be considered?
Furthermore, once they get out they would be even more limited to gaining custody and visitation rights as it is very difficult to do if the person has been in prison or is an offender of any kind, even if they are the biological parent.

Also, being a rapist, wouldn't that simply be immoral on the legal system to allow this as this provides another victim for the rapist to abuse, perhaps I'm just over thinking this and mixing several psychopathic tendencies in one.

This seems like a pointless debate and seems stupid (excuse the language, but is this even a question worth considering) to even consider something like this, I can understand the point of view of the rapist on a theoretical standpoint in terms of them PERHAPS having some feelings for the possible child, but that does not mean they have deserved the right to visit the child or have any contact with them.

This is just getting more and more ridiculous by every moment I spend writing this...
Posted by Wylted 3 years ago
I disagree and I'm considering this.
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 3 years ago
would anyone contest this?
there's always a schmuck to disagree with something. but.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
No it's ok, thanks anyway. I've had too many discussions on this topic to be comfortable discussing it even more, lol...
Posted by WilliamsP 3 years ago
If you want to debate me, go ahead. But prepare to be crushed.
Posted by wrichcirw 3 years ago
Well, you can sue anyone over anything, so I don't see how CON has a defensible case...
1 votes has been placed for this debate.
Vote Placed by Cold-Mind 3 years ago
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Ff