• Both sides are in it for stupid reasons

    Pro-lifers ae in it because they think embryos are alive for some reason, and pro-choicers are only debating because they dont want to lose rights for some reason, if abortion were banned in america, it wouldn't change anything because most women do abortions in mexico anyway, so i don´t see how either side is bothering with this

  • The conversation goes round and round.

    On the one hand, women should be allowed control over their own bodies.
    On the opposing view, abortion is horrible. You are in essence destroying a human life.
    If you think anyone likes or is pro abortion, then you're just an idiot.
    So, in conclusion, the argument has no solid resolution.

    Posted by: LEQ
  • Until we start looking at things objectively

    We need to start by deciding what the the deciding factors are and then use scientific fact not emotion. Is it whether it is a life or not? Well yes it is a life. Is it Human? Well by the only measurable factors yes it is. Viability? Well humans are basically born premature and 100% dependent so this isn't helpfull. Is it consciousness? Well what if I'm unconscious do I know longer have human rights? Ability to feel pain? Well if I loose the ability to feel pain should you be able to kill me? Is it about who's rights take priority the child or the mother? Well how do we decide that in a non subjective matter?

    Until we have the guts to put aside moral arguments and look at the objective facts then yes it is pointless.

  • The conversation is a nonstarter

    The conversation won't convince anyone. If you believe life begins at conception or you don't or you don't value life. The conversation is useless. We should simply return to the federal model were it's legal for states to ban it or allow it. Then if you disapprove of the position of your state vote with your feet.

  • It is the wrong discussion

    The right discussion would be how we can educate people properly so that they will not get pregnant if they do not want to. Ideally you kill a fire right as it starts not when it has spread and burned the whole jungle down. Sex education is mediocre and not sufficiently accessible even in developed countries. Another good discussion would be the proper time/person to have sex with. Prevention is always better than treatment.

  • It's pretty pointless

    Pro-lifers say that life starts at the moment of conception, and they support life. So, should we protest the destruction of eggs, because it could have been a fully formed chicken? Or protest the destruction of seeds and beans, because it could have been a fully formed plant? Of course, human life is very prized, because of the potential of a human being to change the world, and by destroying that embryo, it could have destroyed a potential brilliant mind, like that of Einstein.

    Pro-choice says that a women is allowed control over their bodies., but wouldn't that include choosing not to have sexual intercourse and instead choosing abstinence? Understandably, there are cases of rape, in which there should be a choice of termination due to non-consensual sexual intercourse. However, not all rape victims choose to terminate the baby, and some choose to raise the child instead. Meanwhile, there are women who have fully consensual as much sexual intercourse as they desire, and terminate pregnancy very often.

    And even if we get rid of abortion clinics within a country, it would not stop people from terminating pregnancy. People would try to get rid of the baby in other ways, like by kicking the stomach, or other forms of harm upon the mother, in hopes of riding the child.

  • Belief is integral

    I assume that Prolife are more outraged than afraid of losing their own rights. To them and the way they see things (I assume), allowing Prochoice is allowing mass murder. Perhaps worse to them sanctioned murder. Prochoice I assume don't agree with Prolifers belief in that the fetus is a human (I assume). I can't really blame either side for what they believe and how they act. Prolife certainly seems selfless. Prochoice certainly seems to believe in a persons rights (Even if it is their own), as well as other fully developed humans rights and safety. Belief is integral to humans I think. Emotion is integral. Helps people determine what they believe to be right and wrong. Rambling.

  • This is a horrible oppinion

    First off if we don't talk about hot topics like this nothing in the world would every get done. Second the first comment on the yes side is ridiculous. I will reply to her after. It is not pointless because everyone in the world has an opinion on it so it is important. It also is one of the highly talked about topics which many have changed their opinion on, whether it be for or against. To say that any conversation is pointless is just ignorant.

  • It's an important topic that is being talked about.

    We need to prove the right and stop religious people for judging people who abort. It's a thing people do to help themselves out and as long as somebody is judging it for their stupid reasons, we need to try proving them wrong! The whole debate between religious views and progressive views must continue until progressive views win!

Leave a comment...
(Maximum 900 words)
Leaning says2018-04-27T00:09:34.157
By the way, what do you think constitutes personhood?

By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use.