<?xml version="1.0"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Debate.org: Procrastarian's Debates</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/?order=1&amp;sort=&amp;member=Procrastarian</link>
<description>Customize this RSS feed by going to http://www.debate.org/rss/</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<pubDate>2013-06-19T22:13:36-08:00</pubDate>
<lastBuildDate>2013-06-19T22:13:36-08:00</lastBuildDate>
<item>
<title>Gender selection of children</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Gender-selection-of-children/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) There are two new types of prebirth gender selection techniques that I will present:
1. Micro Start-Sperm is &quot;sorted&quot; so that it will be more likely that the egg will be fertilized by the desired chromosome. (http://www.microstart.com)&#160;

2. Genetic Diagnoses-Embryos created in test tubes are analysed before being inserted into the womb. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki?search=preimplantation+genetic+diagnosis)

I am not arguing pro/for any particular technique, but rather pro/for the option for parents to utilize gender selection.

I will allow my opponent to begin as my primary contention is that there is no valid reason why this practice should not be allowed.

Thanks to my opponent in advance.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Gender-selection-of-children/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2010-01-15T15:36:32-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>Abortion</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/Abortion/59/</link>
<description>(Post Voting Period) Abortion is something that should be kept open as in option to the cases in which it is the best option in the opinion of the mother. The abortion of a fetus is the best choice for some mothers who have been the victim of rape, have no resources to care for a child or for births that were unintended. These three reasons are all enough for a mother to decide what to do with her own body. There is no legal or medical reason not to allow a mother to abort. Nor is there a religious one that could govern all women such as those those who have no religious preference. The control over what happens to ones body is something that one but that person has the right to call the shots. To make a law over this would be a law is no constitutional.</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/Abortion/59/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2010-07-02T15:37:47-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
<item>
<title>The Widespread Distribution of Condoms in Africa is in Africans' Best Interests</title>
<link>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Widespread-Distribution-of-Condoms-in-Africa-is-in-Africans-Best-Interests/1/</link>
<description>(Voting Period) I would like to debate someone who is willing to put thought into this debate. I request that all arguments be at least 1,000 characters (1/5 of the cap) in length. I would also like to avoid semantic disputes surrounding the resolution. This debate is about the mistake countries have made and continue to make by spending millions on condoms to send to African countries.

Arguments
I will begin by outlining my arguments. Once I see which parts my opponent contends, I will elaborate on those specific parts.

1. The distribution of condoms harms women by taking away a major tool they have for protecting themselves against undesired sexual pressures. In African society, a man who impregnates a woman is considered responsible for protecting and supporting the child. This allows women to use this risk of responsibility as a defense. Condoms invalidate this by vastly decreasing the probability of pregnancy. They also make men feel less responsible for any childr</description>
<comments>http://www.debate.org/debates/The-Widespread-Distribution-of-Condoms-in-Africa-is-in-Africans-Best-Interests/1/comments/</comments>
<pubDate>2010-03-10T02:32:06-08:00</pubDate>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>
