Total Posts:125|Showing Posts:1-30|Last Page
Jump to topic:

Abortion - What counts as being alive?

EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
jdmorgan
Posts: 24
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:21:24 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm "the Creator's" inspired word?
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:22:35 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Bickering about when a fetus is alive is not very useful. I am pro-choice, and have no problem just conceding that a fetus is "alive". It has little to no real impact on the argument.
jdmorgan
Posts: 24
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:23:31 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:21:24 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm "the Creator's" inspired word? : :

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm that a body in a womb is an actual living object? Is it possible it's just an illusion in your mind?
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:24:56 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:22:35 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Bickering about when a fetus is alive is not very useful.

This is completely wrong. The whole debate hinges on this fact. If the fetus is alive, then killing it would be killing a human, and therefore ethically/morally/legally wrong.

I am pro-choice, and have no problem just conceding that a fetus is "alive". It has little to no real impact on the argument.

I don't know how much you have debated, but you would instantly lose the debate conceding this point.
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:25:35 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:23:31 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:21:24 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm "the Creator's" inspired word? : :

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm that a body in a womb is an actual living object? Is it possible it's just an illusion in your mind?

Um yeah, it's part of the mother, who is alive.
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:28:13 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:24:56 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:22:35 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Bickering about when a fetus is alive is not very useful.

This is completely wrong. The whole debate hinges on this fact. If the fetus is alive, then killing it would be killing a human, and therefore ethically/morally/legally wrong.

No... No it really doesn't. We allow killing legally in many-many cases. The status of "alive" really is not that big a deal.


I am pro-choice, and have no problem just conceding that a fetus is "alive". It has little to no real impact on the argument.

I don't know how much you have debated, but you would instantly lose the debate conceding this point.

No. you would be wrong. Truth is, the strong case for abortion is body integrity. Even debating morality, living is not the sticking point.
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:32:06 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:28:13 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:24:56 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:22:35 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Bickering about when a fetus is alive is not very useful.

This is completely wrong. The whole debate hinges on this fact. If the fetus is alive, then killing it would be killing a human, and therefore ethically/morally/legally wrong.

No... No it really doesn't. We allow killing legally in many-many cases. The status of "alive" really is not that big a deal.

And how do you justify those killings? This is far removed from the death penalty for heinous crimes. We have an alive human, who has done nothing wrong, who was brought into the world by the demands of others, killed.

Your parallel to other forms of killing is seriously myopic.



I am pro-choice, and have no problem just conceding that a fetus is "alive". It has little to no real impact on the argument.

I don't know how much you have debated, but you would instantly lose the debate conceding this point.

No. you would be wrong. Truth is, the strong case for abortion is body integrity. Even debating morality, living is not the sticking point.

If you seriously believe this, then you are a free win on abortion.
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:40:26 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:32:06 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:28:13 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:24:56 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:22:35 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Bickering about when a fetus is alive is not very useful.

This is completely wrong. The whole debate hinges on this fact. If the fetus is alive, then killing it would be killing a human, and therefore ethically/morally/legally wrong.

No... No it really doesn't. We allow killing legally in many-many cases. The status of "alive" really is not that big a deal.

And how do you justify those killings? This is far removed from the death penalty for heinous crimes. We have an alive human, who has done nothing wrong, who was brought into the world by the demands of others, killed.

A woman has a right to control her own body at the cost of another life. This is the same right that allows a person to kill an attacker. There are much less invasive or dangerous threats society allows killing an aggressor.

This, you should learn, is actually the nugget of the argument of rights.


Your parallel to other forms of killing is seriously myopic.

If you want to debate it some time, I would.




I am pro-choice, and have no problem just conceding that a fetus is "alive". It has little to no real impact on the argument.

I don't know how much you have debated, but you would instantly lose the debate conceding this point.

No. you would be wrong. Truth is, the strong case for abortion is body integrity. Even debating morality, living is not the sticking point.

If you seriously believe this, then you are a free win on abortion.

No... Nope. Not at all. I have won a number of debates where I concede these points to start.

1) the fetus is alive
2) the fetus is a human fetus
3) the fetus has a "future like ours" (pro-live loves this)
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:48:07 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:45:34 AM, TBR wrote:
Yea, this one I won conceding these points
http://www.debate.org...

This one too
http://www.debate.org...

Amazing - you can beat noobs.

Try this: http://www.debate.org...
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:49:42 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:48:07 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:45:34 AM, TBR wrote:
Yea, this one I won conceding these points
http://www.debate.org...

This one too
http://www.debate.org...

Amazing - you can beat noobs.

Try this: http://www.debate.org...

Like I said, if you want to debate it, I will. I will give you the same concessions.

Simply put, going round-and-round about when life begins is not useful or necessary.
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:51:03 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:49:42 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:48:07 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:45:34 AM, TBR wrote:
Yea, this one I won conceding these points
http://www.debate.org...

This one too
http://www.debate.org...

Amazing - you can beat noobs.

Try this: http://www.debate.org...

Like I said, if you want to debate it, I will. I will give you the same concessions.

Simply put, going round-and-round about when life begins is not useful or necessary.

I will show you how "useful" and "necessary" it is by beating you with it...
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:53:06 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Re-do the debate request like an adult, and I will accept.
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:55:12 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:53:06 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Re-do the debate request like an adult, and I will accept.

"Like an adult," huh? You calling me a child? I am 18, thank you. I have to go to uni in like 15 mins; I'll fix it when I get home.

Btw, your only wins on this involve the opponent plagiarising, and the opponent forfeiting -- hardly anything to be proud of.
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:57:57 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:55:12 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:53:06 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Re-do the debate request like an adult, and I will accept.

"Like an adult," huh? You calling me a child? I am 18, thank you. I have to go to uni in like 15 mins; I'll fix it when I get home.

Yea, I am calling you childish (like a child).


Btw, your only wins on this involve the opponent plagiarising, and the opponent forfeiting -- hardly anything to be proud of.

You with three debates are mocking kingd with 64? Look. Put the debate out with acceptable wording (you would have lost conduct points for this alone) and I will accept.
jdmorgan
Posts: 24
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:58:41 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:25:35 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:23:31 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:21:24 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm "the Creator's" inspired word? : :

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm that a body in a womb is an actual living object? Is it possible it's just an illusion in your mind?

Um yeah, it's part of the mother, who is alive. : :

According to quantum mechanics, what you call a living body cannot be proven. This is what is known as the "dead cat" theory.
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 2:59:50 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:57:57 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:55:12 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:53:06 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Re-do the debate request like an adult, and I will accept.

"Like an adult," huh? You calling me a child? I am 18, thank you. I have to go to uni in like 15 mins; I'll fix it when I get home.

Yea, I am calling you childish (like a child).

Wow. How rude.



Btw, your only wins on this involve the opponent plagiarising, and the opponent forfeiting -- hardly anything to be proud of.

You with three debates are mocking kingd with 64? Look. Put the debate out with acceptable wording (you would have lost conduct points for this alone) and I will accept.

Stop bossing me around like you're my dad or something. I told you that I have to go to uni. I want more time to think of an acceptable framework for the debate, okay? Bossyboots.
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:00:34 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:58:41 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:25:35 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:23:31 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:21:24 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm "the Creator's" inspired word? : :

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm that a body in a womb is an actual living object? Is it possible it's just an illusion in your mind?

Um yeah, it's part of the mother, who is alive. : :

According to quantum mechanics, what you call a living body cannot be proven. This is what is known as the "dead cat" theory.

We're clearly not talking at the quantum level...
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:07:04 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:59:50 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:57:57 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:55:12 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:53:06 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Re-do the debate request like an adult, and I will accept.

"Like an adult," huh? You calling me a child? I am 18, thank you. I have to go to uni in like 15 mins; I'll fix it when I get home.

Yea, I am calling you childish (like a child).

Wow. How rude.

Yeah, I was having a nice little conversation on the forum - you brought in the ad hominems. Regardless, your debate challenge was taunting and childish. It would have lost you conduct points right off the bat.




Btw, your only wins on this involve the opponent plagiarising, and the opponent forfeiting -- hardly anything to be proud of.

You with three debates are mocking kingd with 64? Look. Put the debate out with acceptable wording (you would have lost conduct points for this alone) and I will accept.

Stop bossing me around like you're my dad or something. I told you that I have to go to uni. I want more time to think of an acceptable framework for the debate, okay? Bossyboots.

Are you trolling? I asked you to rework the debate question. Yea, it is argumentative and personal. That is not how it is done.

This debate (and thread) are getting less attractive by the second.
Hayd
Posts: 4,022
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:08:18 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

It doesn't matter if its alive. It doesn't matter if its human. What matters is that its included in the moral family. What makes something included in the moral family? The ability to feel pain. This is because suffering is inherently undesirable. Thus causing needless harm to something would be immoral to do. If I torture a dog, the dog feels pain, there is no good result coming from it, thus it is immoral. Thus, if abortion can be considered immoral, the fetus has to feel pain. It doesn't, so you can't really do anything immoral to it. Its like a rock. Once it develops the nervous system and can feel pain, yes. But those abortions shouldnt be done anyways because of health risks
jdmorgan
Posts: 24
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:08:41 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 3:00:34 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:58:41 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:25:35 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:23:31 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:21:24 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm "the Creator's" inspired word? : :

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm that a body in a womb is an actual living object? Is it possible it's just an illusion in your mind?

Um yeah, it's part of the mother, who is alive. : :

According to quantum mechanics, what you call a living body cannot be proven. This is what is known as the "dead cat" theory.

We're clearly not talking at the quantum level... : :

I am. By not understanding how God created everything, man will remain confused about abortion.
Dilara
Posts: 661
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:38:01 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

http://www.secularprolife.org...
Babies have heartbeats by 3-4 weeks gestation. They produce brain waves at 6-7 weeks gestation and can live outside the womb by 21 weeks.
Dilara
Posts: 661
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:39:01 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 2:40:26 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:32:06 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:28:13 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:24:56 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:22:35 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Bickering about when a fetus is alive is not very useful.

This is completely wrong. The whole debate hinges on this fact. If the fetus is alive, then killing it would be killing a human, and therefore ethically/morally/legally wrong.

No... No it really doesn't. We allow killing legally in many-many cases. The status of "alive" really is not that big a deal.

And how do you justify those killings? This is far removed from the death penalty for heinous crimes. We have an alive human, who has done nothing wrong, who was brought into the world by the demands of others, killed.

A woman has a right to control her own body at the cost of another life. This is the same right that allows a person to kill an attacker. There are much less invasive or dangerous threats society allows killing an aggressor.

This, you should learn, is actually the nugget of the argument of rights.


Your parallel to other forms of killing is seriously myopic.

If you want to debate it some time, I would.




I am pro-choice, and have no problem just conceding that a fetus is "alive". It has little to no real impact on the argument.

I don't know how much you have debated, but you would instantly lose the debate conceding this point.

No. you would be wrong. Truth is, the strong case for abortion is body integrity. Even debating morality, living is not the sticking point.

If you seriously believe this, then you are a free win on abortion.

No... Nope. Not at all. I have won a number of debates where I concede these points to start.

1) the fetus is alive
2) the fetus is a human fetus
3) the fetus has a "future like ours" (pro-live loves this)
The baby isn't maliciously attacking the mom.
TBR
Posts: 9,991
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 3:45:02 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 3:39:01 AM, Dilara wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:40:26 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:32:06 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:28:13 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:24:56 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:22:35 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Bickering about when a fetus is alive is not very useful.

This is completely wrong. The whole debate hinges on this fact. If the fetus is alive, then killing it would be killing a human, and therefore ethically/morally/legally wrong.

No... No it really doesn't. We allow killing legally in many-many cases. The status of "alive" really is not that big a deal.

And how do you justify those killings? This is far removed from the death penalty for heinous crimes. We have an alive human, who has done nothing wrong, who was brought into the world by the demands of others, killed.

A woman has a right to control her own body at the cost of another life. This is the same right that allows a person to kill an attacker. There are much less invasive or dangerous threats society allows killing an aggressor.

This, you should learn, is actually the nugget of the argument of rights.


Your parallel to other forms of killing is seriously myopic.

If you want to debate it some time, I would.




I am pro-choice, and have no problem just conceding that a fetus is "alive". It has little to no real impact on the argument.

I don't know how much you have debated, but you would instantly lose the debate conceding this point.

No. you would be wrong. Truth is, the strong case for abortion is body integrity. Even debating morality, living is not the sticking point.

If you seriously believe this, then you are a free win on abortion.

No... Nope. Not at all. I have won a number of debates where I concede these points to start.

1) the fetus is alive
2) the fetus is a human fetus
3) the fetus has a "future like ours" (pro-live loves this)
The baby isn't maliciously attacking the mom.

Malice has not been discussed Dilara. The motives of the attacker is not a requirement in defense of your body. As usual, you are talking about things that have nothing to do with the actual discussion.
Logic-Bomb
Posts: 9
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 4:09:03 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

The definition of life is something that isn't unanimously accepted among biologists. There are many factors that are considered characteristics of life. There are many things that contain some, but not all of these. It's not a black and white.

Take for example the definition you gave from Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction

Viruses do reproduce. They do react to stimuli. They don't have metabolism, and they do not grow, per se. This is one of the reasons that, among Virologists, the issue of whether a virus is alive or not is debated. Personally, from my experience and education in virology, I hold the view that they are not alive per se, but rather a form of sort of alive, and sort of not alive. I'll spare the details of why, as it really isn't relevant to this, but the point is simply that what is defined as alive isn't really a unanimous fact.

Now, in terms of an embryo, there is no debate that it is alive. The cells are very much alive. The problem with the "pro-life" (a rather misnomer) is that the germ cells are also alive when they are just an egg and a sperm cell. They aren't any more or less alive before or after the period of conception (I stress the period, as there is no moment of conception. Like life, the term conception, and really anything in science, isn't some black and white absolute line or moment. It is a series of transitions from one state to another. In this case, a transition of not conceived, to more conceived than not, to conceived).

All cells are alive. The question isn't when does an egg become alive. It was always alive so long as it was an egg cell. The question is, when does it become sentient, and when should it be given rights.

As far as the subject of abortion, I would like to clarify what is meant by 'pro choice', and where I stand. I'm not saying I support abortion, or that I would want my partner to have one. I'm saying I have no grounds on which to dictate what she can or cannot do with her own body, and the view that a cluster of cells in her body has more rights to what she does with it is not mine to force upon her. I am, in every essence of the word, pro "choice".
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 5:46:29 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 3:08:18 AM, Hayd wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

It doesn't matter if its alive. It doesn't matter if its human.

Wow, it's TBR's son.

What matters is that its included in the moral family. What makes something included in the moral family? The ability to feel pain. This is because suffering is inherently undesirable. Thus causing needless harm to something would be immoral to do. If I torture a dog, the dog feels pain, there is no good result coming from it, thus it is immoral. Thus, if abortion can be considered immoral, the fetus has to feel pain. It doesn't, so you can't really do anything immoral to it. Its like a rock. Once it develops the nervous system and can feel pain, yes. But those abortions shouldnt be done anyways because of health risks

You do realise that there are more values at play than a singular line of morality and pain, right? Saying that "it doesn't matter if it[']s alive" suggests a myopic view, especially when you only consider two values (a morality and pain).
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 5:47:54 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 3:08:41 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 3:00:34 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:58:41 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:25:35 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:23:31 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:21:24 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:01:47 AM, jdmorgan wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think? : :

The body that's growing in a womb is not important at all to the Creator of it since he's the one who has it killed eventually.

Deuteronomy 32
39: "`See now that I, even I, am he, and there is no god beside me; I kill and I make alive; I wound and I heal; and there is none that can deliver out of my hand.

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm "the Creator's" inspired word? : :

Do you have any scientific/logical framework to affirm that a body in a womb is an actual living object? Is it possible it's just an illusion in your mind?

Um yeah, it's part of the mother, who is alive. : :

According to quantum mechanics, what you call a living body cannot be proven. This is what is known as the "dead cat" theory.

We're clearly not talking at the quantum level... : :

I am.

*We* [not just *you*] are not talking at the quantum level.

By not understanding how God created everything, man will remain confused about abortion.

Well, that's a whole different debate...
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...
EvanescentEfflorescence
Posts: 303
Add as Friend
Challenge to a Debate
Send a Message
5/9/2016 5:50:14 AM
Posted: 7 months ago
At 5/9/2016 3:07:04 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:59:50 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:57:57 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:55:12 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
At 5/9/2016 2:53:06 AM, TBR wrote:
At 5/9/2016 1:57:19 AM, EvanescentEfflorescence wrote:
I've come across a few answers for this. For the Pro-life side, of which doesn't want zygotes or embryos to be considered life, MRS GREN is the acronym used to remember 7 qualities (apparently) required for life. However, upon a quick DuckDuckGo search, I can't seem to find any justification for this. Is there something or someone important that justifies this? Or is it something like one of the those stupid Donald Trump memes? Here is an explanation of MRS GREN: http://www.bbc.co.uk...

Meanwhile, there are people like Professor of bio-ethics and philosophy Francis Beckwith, who says that all that is needed to grant the status of life is: (1) metabolism, (2) growth, (3) reaction to stimuli, and (4) reproduction (in zygotes, this happens as cell reproduction called twinning): (Source) Beckwith, F. (2007). Defending life: a moral and legal case against abortion choice. Cambridge University Press, New York.

I'm not shilling for either side; I genuinely want to know what is the best conception of what is considered life.

What do you think?

Re-do the debate request like an adult, and I will accept.

"Like an adult," huh? You calling me a child? I am 18, thank you. I have to go to uni in like 15 mins; I'll fix it when I get home.

Yea, I am calling you childish (like a child).

Wow. How rude.

Yeah, I was having a nice little conversation on the forum - you brought in the ad hominems.

I did not. I said your comments were garbage and something else (I don't care to look).

Regardless, your debate challenge was taunting and childish. It would have lost you conduct points right off the bat.

Are you really in your 40s? Get over it, buddy.





Btw, your only wins on this involve the opponent plagiarising, and the opponent forfeiting -- hardly anything to be proud of.

You with three debates are mocking kingd with 64? Look. Put the debate out with acceptable wording (you would have lost conduct points for this alone) and I will accept.

Stop bossing me around like you're my dad or something. I told you that I have to go to uni. I want more time to think of an acceptable framework for the debate, okay? Bossyboots.

Are you trolling? I asked you to rework the debate question. Yea, it is argumentative and personal. That is not how it is done.

What did your last daughter die of, Mr Dictator?


This debate (and thread) are getting less attractive by the second.

Then run away and be a coward.
Free vote -- short read. I've spent well over 15 hours researching abortion in the past week, so there might be something there for you. I recommend reading Con's counter-arguments first to come to a quick decisions, but the choice is all yours:

http://www.debate.org...

The opponent didn't respond:

http://www.debate.org...

No response:

http://www.debate.org...