Total Posts:74|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Abortion is a social necessity at the moment.

pozessed
Posts: 1,034
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 2:13:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
I don't mean to be blunt, and I would never suggest having an abortion to someone individually. However as a society I think it's necessary. If abortion is deemed illegal it will hurt our society more than help it.

Abortion pros-

Ignorant, naive, neglectful, irresponsible, or spiteful people, may prevent themselves from having children.
It is still an option as a free choice.
Social progression may be delayed if birth is forced upon parents.
A life that will most likely be born into poverty was averted.

Abortion cons-

A life is lost.

I'm sorry to sound so callous, but I would never think to have an abortion or tell anyone else they should.

I also don't feel it's my right to allow government to interfere with safer, and more effective options for unwanted conceptions than the ones provided if abortion were illegal.
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.

They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:46:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.


They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.

Not to mention it kills millions. Yay!
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:47:02 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 2:13:18 PM, pozessed wrote:
I don't mean to be blunt, and I would never suggest having an abortion to someone individually. However as a society I think it's necessary. If abortion is deemed illegal it will hurt our society more than help it.

Abortion pros-

Ignorant, naive, neglectful, irresponsible, or spiteful people, may prevent themselves from having children.
It is still an option as a free choice.
Social progression may be delayed if birth is forced upon parents.
A life that will most likely be born into poverty was averted.



Abortion cons-


A life is lost.



I'm sorry to sound so callous, but I would never think to have an abortion or tell anyone else they should.

I also don't feel it's my right to allow government to interfere with safer, and more effective options for unwanted conceptions than the ones provided if abortion were illegal.

I'm sorry, when did your feelings and such supersede someone's life?
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:48:55 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 3:46:02 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.


They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.

Not to mention it kills millions. Yay!

They aren't persons, they have no rights. Furthermore, women have the right to private property and with that comes self-ownership. This means they control their bodies not fetuses and not governments.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
Ren
Posts: 7,102
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:51:40 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 2:13:18 PM, pozessed wrote:

Ignorant, naive, neglectful, irresponsible, or spiteful people, may prevent themselves from having children.

LOL.

Well, then. That is among the most compelling reasons I've seen yet.
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:58:36 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 3:48:55 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:46:02 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.


They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.

Not to mention it kills millions. Yay!

They aren't persons, they have no rights. Furthermore, women have the right to private property and with that comes self-ownership. This means they control their bodies not fetuses and not governments.

Con almost human fetus rights but pro animal rights. What?
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 3:59:29 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Btw, for me it depends on what stage it's at.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 4:02:00 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 3:58:36 PM, phantom wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:48:55 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:46:02 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.


They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.

Not to mention it kills millions. Yay!

They aren't persons, they have no rights. Furthermore, women have the right to private property and with that comes self-ownership. This means they control their bodies not fetuses and not governments.

Con almost human fetus rights but pro animal rights. What?

I am not against animals having abortions. I am against animals being inhumanely except for animal testing since well...that actually helps the human species.

If it was a animal that was inside the woman I endorse her choice to remove it also.
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
phantom
Posts: 6,774
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 4:32:08 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 4:02:00 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:58:36 PM, phantom wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:48:55 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:46:02 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.


They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.

Not to mention it kills millions. Yay!

They aren't persons, they have no rights. Furthermore, women have the right to private property and with that comes self-ownership. This means they control their bodies not fetuses and not governments.

Con almost human fetus rights but pro animal rights. What?

I am not against animals having abortions. I am against animals being inhumanely except for animal testing since well...that actually helps the human species.

If it was a animal that was inside the woman I endorse her choice to remove it also.

You said they have no rights. That implied no rights at all, not simply in correlation to their right to continue to live.
"Music is a zen-like ecstatic state where you become the new man of the future, the Nietzschean merger of Apollo and Dionysus." Ray Manzarek (The Doors)
Deathbeforedishonour
Posts: 1,058
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 4:34:23 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 4:32:08 PM, phantom wrote:
At 12/4/2012 4:02:00 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:58:36 PM, phantom wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:48:55 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:46:02 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.


They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.

Not to mention it kills millions. Yay!

They aren't persons, they have no rights. Furthermore, women have the right to private property and with that comes self-ownership. This means they control their bodies not fetuses and not governments.

Con almost human fetus rights but pro animal rights. What?

I am not against animals having abortions. I am against animals being inhumanely except for animal testing since well...that actually helps the human species.

If it was a animal that was inside the woman I endorse her choice to remove it also.

You said they have no rights. That implied no rights at all, not simply in correlation to their right to continue to live.

Sorry, I meant they had no rights over the host. :/
"In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God." ~ John 1:1

Matthew 10:22- "And ye shall be hated of all men for my name's sake: but he that endureth to the end shall be saved."
YYW
Posts: 36,282
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 5:26:43 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 2:13:18 PM, pozessed wrote:
I don't mean to be blunt, and I would never suggest having an abortion to someone individually. However as a society I think it's necessary. If abortion is deemed illegal it will hurt our society more than help it.

Abortion pros-

Ignorant, naive, neglectful, irresponsible, or spiteful people, may prevent themselves from having children.
It is still an option as a free choice.
Social progression may be delayed if birth is forced upon parents.
A life that will most likely be born into poverty was averted.



Abortion cons-


A life is lost.



I'm sorry to sound so callous, but I would never think to have an abortion or tell anyone else they should.

I also don't feel it's my right to allow government to interfere with safer, and more effective options for unwanted conceptions than the ones provided if abortion were illegal.

There is a paper I read on economic absolute and comparative advantages and the role abortion plays on both in post-industrial countries which arrives at a similar conclusion.
Tsar of DDO
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 7:08:07 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
Why does everybody get caught up in this whole "life lost" thing? Seriously. It's one life. In the grand evolutionary scale of things, a speck of dust is more significant than that one life.

Inb4 "Would I want to be killed? hurr...durr...."
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 7:10:22 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
It's not like we have any moral obligation to protect human life; all of our values are purely subjective, which means that you can't prove your moral viewpoint over any other's. Thus, morality is redundant in pretty much any topic.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/4/2012 10:04:19 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 7:08:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why does everybody get caught up in this whole "life lost" thing? Seriously. It's one life. In the grand evolutionary scale of things, a speck of dust is more significant than that one life.

Inb4 "Would I want to be killed? hurr...durr...."

It's never been about protecting life.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 12:05:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 7:08:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why does everybody get caught up in this whole "life lost" thing? Seriously. It's one life. In the grand evolutionary scale of things, a speck of dust is more significant than that one life.

Inb4 "Would I want to be killed? hurr...durr...."

Well, actually, it's several million, and your totally taking it out of context.

Some girls pain and is comfort brought on here, potentially, by being pregnant is even more irrelevant if we're gonna look at things that way.

And if your gonna bring up that BS "Why is life important?" argument, it's because we're using societies morals as of now, which values human life.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
OberHerr
Posts: 13,062
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 12:07:21 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 3:48:55 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:46:02 PM, OberHerr wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:41:58 PM, Deathbeforedishonour wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.


They also prevent that annoying prick known as overpopulation.

Not to mention it kills millions. Yay!

They aren't persons, they have no rights.

Yeah, sorry to break it to you Ma'am, but in fact that is what's up for debate. :L

Furthermore, women have the right to private property and with that comes self-ownership. This means they control their bodies not fetuses and not governments.

Course, that always brings up the issue of the baby is an innocent bystander forced on her property by either her choice, or by some jerk.
-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-OBERHERR'S SIGNATURE-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-

Official Enforcer for the DDO Elite(if they existed).

"Cases are anti-town." - FourTrouble

-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-~-
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 12:23:43 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.

why not do more to decrease the crime rate and have forced abortions for lower income families.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
badger
Posts: 11,793
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 12:27:45 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 12:23:43 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.

why not do more to decrease the crime rate and have forced abortions for lower income families.

might make for more equality too what with wealth distribution. let's deprive the lower class of children!
signature
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 12:58:15 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 12:23:43 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.

why not do more to decrease the crime rate and have forced abortions for lower income families.

Because that would piss a shit load of people off.

Otherwise, great idea.

A decreasing population would also create less divisions of wealth. Although, it would slow down growth.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 1:02:25 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 12:58:15 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/5/2012 12:23:43 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.

why not do more to decrease the crime rate and have forced abortions for lower income families.

Because that would piss a shit load of people off.

Otherwise, great idea.

A decreasing population would also create less divisions of wealth. Although, it would slow down growth.

what do you mean by that. You mean a more equitable income between a population (why?)
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 1:09:54 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 1:02:25 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/5/2012 12:58:15 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/5/2012 12:23:43 AM, darkkermit wrote:
At 12/4/2012 3:19:01 PM, FREEDO wrote:
Abortion is highly effective at reducing crime rates. The great majority of abortions are for lower income families.

why not do more to decrease the crime rate and have forced abortions for lower income families.

Because that would piss a shit load of people off.

Otherwise, great idea.

A decreasing population would also create less divisions of wealth. Although, it would slow down growth.

what do you mean by that. You mean a more equitable income between a population (why?)

In terms of it pissing off a whole bunch of people, some people are pissed off at legal abortions and its easy to conceive of a society where less people would be upset with this outcome.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 1:43:19 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 1:02:25 AM, darkkermit wrote:
what do you mean by that. You mean a more equitable income between a population (why?)

I'm not sure why you ask. It seems pretty common sense. Less people eat a pie, more for each person. Although I personally detest common sense, for the most part. So I'd find it enjoyable if you ripped that perspective apart and devoured it's liver with a nice chainti and some fave beans.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 1:48:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 1:43:19 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/5/2012 1:02:25 AM, darkkermit wrote:
what do you mean by that. You mean a more equitable income between a population (why?)

I'm not sure why you ask. It seems pretty common sense. Less people eat a pie, more for each person. Although I personally detest common sense, for the most part. So I'd find it enjoyable if you ripped that perspective apart and devoured it's liver with a nice chainti and some fave beans.

this is an argument for more wealth per person. Not necessarily that it would be more equitble. There can still be a person taking up half the pie, regardless of the size. In terms of equitable, at what scale too. Worldwide, nationwide, local? It would take many decades for poor countries to rise to become wealthy nations even if we assume they grow their economies at high rates.

And its not common sense, because people are involved in making bigger pie. The pie isn't a fixed amount.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
FREEDO
Posts: 21,057
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 1:53:51 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 1:48:49 AM, darkkermit wrote:
And its not common sense, because people are involved in making bigger pie. The pie isn't a fixed amount.

Like I said, it would also reduce growth.

But it would also increase the average wealth unless, for some reason, it causes growth to go backwards. Which doesn't make sense unless we're destroying things.
GRAND POOBAH OF DDO

fnord
darkkermit
Posts: 11,204
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 10:14:06 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 1:53:51 AM, FREEDO wrote:
At 12/5/2012 1:48:49 AM, darkkermit wrote:
And its not common sense, because people are involved in making bigger pie. The pie isn't a fixed amount.

Like I said, it would also reduce growth.

But it would also increase the average wealth unless, for some reason, it causes growth to go backwards. Which doesn't make sense unless we're destroying things.

well yes, but a lot of wealth is "imaginary" in the sense that the value of a piece of equipment is based on future demand. Get rid of future demand (by less people), then the value of the investment goes down.
Open borders debate:
http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 11:29:49 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/4/2012 2:13:18 PM, pozessed wrote:
I don't mean to be blunt, and I would never suggest having an abortion to someone individually. However as a society I think it's necessary. If abortion is deemed illegal it will hurt our society more than help it.


Ah yes, the age old question... "How many benefits is sufficient (towards the greater good) to justify the denial of human rights to others?"
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Chuz-Life
Posts: 1,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 11:33:12 AM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 11:29:49 AM, Chuz-Life wrote:
At 12/4/2012 2:13:18 PM, pozessed wrote:
I don't mean to be blunt, and I would never suggest having an abortion to someone individually. However as a society I think it's necessary. If abortion is deemed illegal it will hurt our society more than help it.


Ah yes, the age old question... "How many benefits is* sufficient (towards the greater good) to justify the denial of human rights to others?"

*How many benefits ARE sufficient? (derp)
"Sooner or later, the Supreme Court of the Unites States is going to have explain how a 'child in the womb' is a person enough to be recognized as a MURDER victim under our fetal homicide laws but how they are not persons enough to qualify for any other Constitutional protections" ~ Chuz Life

http://www.debate.org...
Lordknukle
Posts: 12,788
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
12/5/2012 1:42:18 PM
Posted: 4 years ago
At 12/5/2012 12:05:43 AM, OberHerr wrote:
At 12/4/2012 7:08:07 PM, Lordknukle wrote:
Why does everybody get caught up in this whole "life lost" thing? Seriously. It's one life. In the grand evolutionary scale of things, a speck of dust is more significant than that one life.

Inb4 "Would I want to be killed? hurr...durr...."

Well, actually, it's several million, and your totally taking it out of context.

If you have no moral problem with taking one life, then you have no moral problem with taking multiple and vice versa. Any line drawn is purely arbitrary and unjustified.

Some girls pain and is comfort brought on here, potentially, by being pregnant is even more irrelevant if we're gonna look at things that way.

What?

And if your gonna bring up that BS "Why is life important?" argument, it's because we're using societies morals as of now, which values human life.

Became an athiest? :)

Anywho, if we accept that morality is subjective, then the line is then drawn either at society or at the individual. Considering the logistical problems with defining what a society is (why am I not my own "society"; how many people classify as a society?) and the fact that individuals are moral units, not society, the only logical conclusion is that morality is subjective based on individuals. Therefore, no individual has a right to impose their own morality onto others, hence anarchy.
"Easy is the descent to Avernus, for the door to the Underworld lies upon both day and night. But to retrace your steps and return to the breezes above- that's the task, that's the toil."