So I'm going to have a debate about abortion in my Civics class soon, probably as the only person remotely pro-Life. Odds are stacked against me, and I need more than "life is precious" to hold my own. Which is why Google is helpless for me. It's all like, abortion is slavery, wahhh. Also, we don't have an abortion thread, so we might as well start the shitfest.
Please god no i just don't want this, well this going to turn out bad but here i go I'm on the fence on this issue (Mostly cause i find it to be a waste of time and it just leads to fight) however i understand the idea of the women's right, however you also have to argue the child's right (which by all biological standard you can argue it is a real human being thus committing murder when you kill it) However i always hated it when people say "I hate abortion but in rape its o.k" so what your saying is that the child doesn't have a right to life and to do great (or bad) things just because it was a product of rape? that's sick. However say the women's life is in danger is it ethical to go through with child birth, when there is a great percent chance that both the mother and the baby will die. Which i say, i argue for the mother. You also have the argument of even if we did illegalize all abortion, people will still get them and have been getting them illegally for years now by back ally doctors. Which has lead to a lot of women's death. There is so many arguments and counter arguments for this issue i can't make a true stance and it always turns into a fighting match.
Regardless of your moral standpoint, it is not the government's job to dictate the issue, as it is just very touchy, no body should have the right to tell everybody what is right and what is wrong, it should be up to the individual to decide. So your boned Kara. Your going to have to rely on calling it murder, but be lenient, they are going to bring up the obvious ones, such as rape, or if the mother's life is threatened, or what if she's underage. Come up with answer's to those obvious questions and you should be good. I would advise that you argue that abortion be made legal circumstantially, depending on the conditions surrounding the pregnancy and any possible complications it may have. Is this a moral or legal debate? If you want abortion to be outlawed, then I don't know what else to tell you.
Well scare tactics are always good when it comes to arguing in front of a bunch of illiterate dumpster monkeys like all of your high school classmates. Just talk about how the doctors viciously rend the flesh from proto-infantile bones while the mother cackles in ecstasy. Appeal to the maternal instinct. Alternatively you could argue from the animal rights point of view, which holds that non-persons deserve some protections (most notably to life) because they can feel, and thus suffer. Of course this can only work after a certain point in the pregnancy, and even then you're forced to defend all of the organic automatons out there who have nervous systems, like cows and chickens. The best argument that you can make about abortion is that it deprives a person of all their experiences. The reason murder is wrong is because it prevents the person who died from living out the rest of their lives. Of course the obvious flaw in this argument is that you have to establish that fetuses are people. Good luck with that one, let me know how it turns out.
As long as it does not hurt the mother in any way shape or form then I think they should not be allowed to get an abortion. If the women was raped then she is entitled to get an abortion. If her life is in danger then she is entitled to get an abortion. And I also think if she is 16 or under she should be allowed to get an abortion. Other than that I see no reason why the mothers just can't put the child up for adoption once he is born.
*Sigh* why am i doing this????? But what makes the Rape child any less then any other child, does the baby have a right to life and a right to live even if it is a result of rape. On what grounds are you going to kill something just because it was made by choice doesn't mean it doesn't have the right to live.
I think my best bet will be to compromise on the life endangering subject and then do what Viking Socrates is doing on rape. Also, sadly Kal my MIDDLESCHOOL classmates actually know shit. So I have to actually plan my steps out. I'm not entirly sure on the underaged part.
A acorn is not a tree, and a seed is not a plant. A fetus is not a human being. Even if it was, no one, especially not the government, has any right to dictate what people do with their body.
If fetuses are established as people then your right to privacy means nothing against the fetus's right to life. The government is obligated to protect those who cannot protect themselves.
Holy fucker I thought you were older. Well that explains quite a bit I guess. But they aren't people. If a pregnant woman and her husband go to a restaurant they won't get a table for three.
Even if we establish a fetus as a "person", it still has no consciousness or concept of pain. Therefore, the very lack of that would make it non-human, regardless of what you consider it.
Well, first off, a person is defined by having a consciousness. But your argument would also make it seem like people who have defective nervous systems or severe mental retardation aren't humans.
That's what I'm saying. I was simply stating that even if you consider a non-conscious fetus a person, it can't be classified as such, so it is not in a position to be protected by the government. Also, those people are human. Both have a concept of reality, and are capable of conscious though. The condition of the mind are irrelevant, as long as the "gears" are turning, albeit slowly.
