The Instigator
AreYouSureYouWannaDebate
Pro (for)
Losing
6 Points
The Contender
STALIN
Con (against)
Winning
14 Points

Should Mentally Challenged Kids Be Aborted?

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 7 votes the winner is...
STALIN
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 2/9/2014 Category: People
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,422 times Debate No: 45512
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (12)
Votes (7)

 

AreYouSureYouWannaDebate

Pro

This debate will be based off personal opinion, and good reasoning for any opinion
STALIN

Con

You can't abort a child just because there is something wrong with his/her brain.
Debate Round No. 1
AreYouSureYouWannaDebate

Pro

You can't abort a child just because there is something wrong with his/her brain."

I agree with you, but i don't. I only think it's right(challenged kids being aborted) because, For 1. Mentally challenged kids will have to live their lives being treated as different, because of their defect. 2. Mentally challenged kids won't be able to fully enjoy life Ex: Doing things like playing sports, go places on their own, driving etc
3. Some mentally challenged kids need someone to help them with basic things like, bathing, using the bathroom, brushing their teeth etc
It is wrong to abort a child, but i see this as a good reason because it saves a person from suffering threw life because of something they can't control. Even though they can't tell the difference. These statements also go for when the child becomes an adult
STALIN

Con

"Mentally challenged kids will have to live their lives being treated as different, because of their defect."

Thats not an excuse to kill them.

"Mentally challenged kids won't be able to fully enjoy life Ex: Doing things like playing sports, go places on their own, driving etc"

No sources or facts to support this statement. How would Pro know whether or not mentally challenged people enjoy life.

"Some mentally challenged kids need someone to help them with basic things like, bathing, using the bathroom, brushing their teeth etc"

Everybody needs help once in a while. Does that mean you should kill everybody?


"It is wrong to abort a child, but i see this as a good reason because it saves a person from suffering threw life because of something they can't control. Even though they can't tell the difference. These statements also go for when the child becomes an adult"

This is unsupported. It should be up to the child if he/she wants to die.
Debate Round No. 2
12 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Posted by ESocialBookworm 3 years ago
ESocialBookworm
CON all the way. Sorry Pro. As you said, it's a "personal opinion." Though opinions can already be personal so it's my opinion.
Posted by the_streetsurfer 3 years ago
the_streetsurfer
What is the difference between a mentally disabled child and a "normal" child? One thing: Development. A "normal" child is more developed than a child with down syndrome. Using that same logic, Barrack Obama should be allowed to kill me because I'm not as developed as him: I'm not as smart as him and most likely will never be. In comparison to him, I am underdeveloped. As you can see, someone doesn't deserve to die simply because they are underdeveloped. I hope you know that the title of this debate nearly made me sick.
Posted by Geogeer 3 years ago
Geogeer
@kbub that depends on the definition of child that you are using. If you are using the definition of child as the age between a toddler and a teenager then you are correct. If you are using the scientific parent-child relationship, then it is a child of the parent from fertilization until death. As such a child can be aborted up until the time of birth.
Posted by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
You can't abort a child. You can* abort a fetus or possibly a baby.
Posted by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
RFD's should always indicate clear signs of having actually read the debate.

@AreYouSure: Try not to get discouraged. However please define things in more detail next time.

@saxman: Your dislike of Sparta, is not justification for a full seven point votebomb; heck your comment in here was closer to being a RFD than the one you gave with your vote. "This is a stupid debate, and stalin clearly won."
Posted by saxman 3 years ago
saxman
Aborting defective children is what they did in sparta. Sparta fell. Athens rose. History has the answer
Posted by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
Personally, I don't see abortion as right or wrong in itself. That depends on the situation, and the awareness one has of it. In the case of disability, it depends on both the level of disability, and foreknowledge of it. If you know your child is going to be born with disabilities to the point where he/she will be unable to do anything on their own, then it could be argued as immoral not to have an abortion.
Posted by AreYouSureYouWannaDebate 3 years ago
AreYouSureYouWannaDebate
"This is unsupported. It should be up to the child if he/she wants to die."

My opponents words

Abortion kills the developing baby before it's born. A developing baby can't make a choice of that nature.
Posted by AreYouSureYouWannaDebate 3 years ago
AreYouSureYouWannaDebate
You guys are making ignorant comments like this, just because i'm new to this site
7 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 7 records.
Vote Placed by codemeister13 3 years ago
codemeister13
AreYouSureYouWannaDebateSTALINTied
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 Checkmark-1 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: Honestly, overall, this debate was kind of just... eh. I wish the instigator had made it a bit longer than two rounds. Then I might have had something better to create a judgment on. Unfortunately, with what's given to me, I must give STALIN the few points I can give due to his refutations and his questioning of Pro's arguments.
Vote Placed by BeckyDawg 3 years ago
BeckyDawg
AreYouSureYouWannaDebateSTALINTied
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 Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:--Vote Checkmark3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:01 
Reasons for voting decision: I agreed with Con, where Pro spoke for mentally challenged children not enjoying life. Con only refuted statements made by Pro and did not make any arguments of his or her own.
Vote Placed by janetsanders733 3 years ago
janetsanders733
AreYouSureYouWannaDebateSTALINTied
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: Con had more sources and evidence and arguements. We shouldn't abort a child because of their brain state
Vote Placed by kbub 3 years ago
kbub
AreYouSureYouWannaDebateSTALINTied
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: Arguments go to Stalin. I'm pretty neutral when it comes to abortion, but Pro needs to come up with a heckofalot more analysis before s/he can prove that abortion discriminated by perceived future mental capacity is ok.
Vote Placed by Krazzy_Player 3 years ago
Krazzy_Player
AreYouSureYouWannaDebateSTALINTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro explained the problems of mentally challenged kids and reason, "why these kids should be aborted"?
Vote Placed by Ragnar 3 years ago
Ragnar
AreYouSureYouWannaDebateSTALINTied
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:30 
Reasons for voting decision: CONDUCT: No breaches. S&G: "threw" stood out to me, but than con has flawed punctuation; in any case, nothing significantly distracted from the cases. ARGUMENTS: "You can't abort a child just because..." I found this assertion to be weak, as you can abort a baby for any reason you please. "...not an excuse to kill them" that was the definition of an excuse to kill them. "No sources or facts to support this statement" please read R1 for the setup rules, this debate actually calls for no sources. "It should be up to the child if he/she wants to die" abortion is before they have any ability to make choices, at no point did specifying infanticide come into this debate to at least move them closer to making choices. "Everybody needs help once in a while. Does that mean you should kill everybody?" Very good point, even if cross examination should not be done in the final round. SOURCES: R1 clearly stated no sources would be used, thus this is a debate about assertions without evidence.
Vote Placed by mrsatan 3 years ago
mrsatan
AreYouSureYouWannaDebateSTALINTied
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: Neither side had much in the way of arguments, but the scope of the proposition is simply too vague for Pro to meet BoP, so Con really doesn't need to do much at all. Perhaps in the very most extreme cases of disability (assuming there is knowledge of it prior to birth) an abortion should be encouraged. But, it seems Pro is suggesting that even minor disabilities are impossible to overcome for a happy life, which is simply untrue. I know a handful of mentally/physically challenged people whom are happier than most of the "normal" people I know.