The Instigator
dairygirl4u2c
Pro (for)
Losing
0 Points
The Contender
Walrus101
Con (against)
Winning
16 Points

same thing: self defense, tiller's abortions, and someone killing two year olds

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...
Walrus101
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 5/27/2013 Category: Politics
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 831 times Debate No: 34244
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (4)
Votes (4)

 

dairygirl4u2c

Pro

tiller is a man who did late term abortions, of viable babies, for trivial reasons. one example is he killed a baby at 26 weeks because the mom wanted to go to a rock concert. he did not comply with rules that determine how to determine viability, etc.

the next hypothetical says that a man is killing two year olds illegally.

how is it different to be doing illegal abortions, than someone killing two year olds? it's essentially the same thing.

for that reason, if we see that politics and law aren't working to stop the two year old killer, we should engage in defense of others and shoot the man killing the children. in teh same manner, at least when he's doing those illegal abortions mentioned, we should engage in defesnse of others of the babies being aborted, at least right before the abortion occurs.

how are these situations different?
if you use the soverignty of the mom... how is it not her fault that she didnt abort earlier when morally grayer (even the law recognizes no absolute right), and how not her fault that she is at least partially responsible for the child's existance etc?

please say how these situations are different.
Walrus101

Con

I accept, giving that I understand that I must prove how self defense, tiller's abortions, and someone killing two year old are NOT the same thing. Lets begin.

Open Minded....Somewhat:
You have posted a debate to be answered by a certain individual. I'm guessing that's not me, but I still can debate most anything. So you ask how illegally aborting an unborn child and killing a two year old is different? Well, I think that we both know the difference is all in the process. You would not abort a baby anything like you would kill a two year old. You see, a baby is aborted through a process which cannot even relate to murder. Have you ever seen a John Two Shoe being killed by aborting to death? No, because John is already two years old, and therefore can only be killed in different ways. The Murderer must then either decide to kill the child, or not to kill the child. And, if his/her stereotype stays true, they will in fact kill the child. Most killers do not kill unborn children unless it happen to be in a victim. So, at a standpoint of process, abortion and killing a two year old are completely different, in process, and will not be treated the same.
Debate Round No. 1
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

who cares what process was used. they are both illegal murders.

you might be going down the road of, at least one is plausibly understandable, arguable, debateable etc. but just because
abortion in general is debateable, that doesn't mean all abortions are. we shouldnt put the baby with the bathwater.

who cares what process was used. they are both illegal murders.
Walrus101

Con

First Corrections:
I had hoped for a stronger rebuttal, something to base my argument on, in pursuit of a quicker response. This is a debate, making the subject open to debate. So therefore abortion was open to debate in this setting, where responses are necessary, so we can learn something from this debate. You failed to notice that the processes are different, and should be treated this way. You do not abort the same way you murder, which happens to be my main point, and requires a proper response. Hopefully you realize that abortion is completely legal, subtracting the earlier one, but you failed to address that in your rebuttal.
Debate Round No. 2
dairygirl4u2c

Pro

"You do not abort the same way you murder, which happens to be my main point, and requires a proper response.

i recognize they look a bit different, but that's all. how is it significant? both involve killing a living human being for unjustifiable reasons.
i can only assume ht epoint you are trying to make is the bit about "understandability", that's why i post that response, which you've yet to respond to.

"Hopefully you realize that abortion is completely legal, subtracting the earlier one, but you failed to address that in your rebuttal.

actualy, not all abortions are legal. that's one of my main points. illegal abortions of viable babies for trivial reasons.
Walrus101

Con

Realizing Your Mistakes, Missed By The Eye:
I clearly stated that abortions are legal, subtracting the one you mentioned. Aborting and Murder look different, but this is normal since they are different. I'm not supporting Abortion, but stating that they are not all the same, since that's what you asked for. I do not claim any understandability, but exploit the fact that you did not use correct terminology when you created the said debate. Abortion and Murder are not the same thing since they are practiced differently, thus making them much less than the same thing. I do not try to justify the action, but inform how they are different.
Debate Round No. 3
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by Anon_Y_Mous 3 years ago
Anon_Y_Mous
dairygirl4u2c:

If you really want people not to focus on the fact that abortion and killing a two year old is not the same thing, you should probably consider changing the debate, because in its current state, it's a debate about whether or not self defense, Tiller's abortions, and someone killing two year olds is the same thing.
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 3 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
i edited and changed the debate
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 3 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
again, please focus right away on the two year old hypothetical. if they were killing two year olds etc etc...
in case anyone is wondering, yes this is why i started the debates again. waiting for people to actually address that argument. preferably something more than just "not the same"
Posted by dairygirl4u2c 3 years ago
dairygirl4u2c
again, please focus right away on the two year old hypothetical. if they were killing two year olds etc etc...
in case anyone is wondering, yes this is why i started the debates again. waiting for people to actually address that argument. preferably something more than just "not the same"
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by newbiehere 3 years ago
newbiehere
dairygirl4u2cWalrus101Tied
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: I saw the debate topic and was hoping for something about morality and whatnot, but... nope. I feel like Con could have made his point even clearer by citing examples of how two killings can be completely different (I would have discussed a man being tortured to death for war crimes vs. painless euthanasia because of a disease), but that's a personal opinion, which means I'm probably completely wrong for saying it. Con wrote better and didn't make me face-palm. Therefore, he wins.
Vote Placed by Skeptikitten 3 years ago
Skeptikitten
dairygirl4u2cWalrus101Tied
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: Pro is not only well nigh incomprehensible, but insisted Con should focus on something that is counter to her initial resolution, and couldn't make a rebuttal of any points but rather just made comments like "who cares".
Vote Placed by Anon_Y_Mous 3 years ago
Anon_Y_Mous
dairygirl4u2cWalrus101Tied
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: Pro insists that people haven't been addressing the argument that abortion and killing two year olds is not the same, but Con did so repeatedly, only to have their valid points supposedly refuted by 'who cares' and 'how is it significant'.
Vote Placed by mananlak 3 years ago
mananlak
dairygirl4u2cWalrus101Tied
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: Pro had the worst argument I have ever seen on DDO.