Abortion is a fundamental human right.
NYCdebater, October 4, 2021, 729 views, 23
Agree
+-
For people who argue for the rights of the fetus, what about the rights of the women? Can't believe this is still a hot button issue in 2021 America.
Guest User 712, 11 views, 2 rebuttals, 4
+-
They have a right to use birth control. Sexually active women should own their body and prevent pregnancy
Guest User 729, 1 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
The right for a woman to kill a human being? I don't think so . . . Nobody, whether man or woman, has the right to murder it is God's will.
Guest User 720, 3 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
A fetus being or not being human doesn't mean it has any right to a woman's body, and a person doesn't lose their right to deny someone their body because it happens to be a fetus.
Guest User 550, 26 views, 2 rebuttals, 1
+-
What about the fact that the woman was the cause of the baby's existence and if you make a human being you can't kill it.
Guest User 610, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
I disagree. People lose their right to bodily autonomy when they make an active choice in creating the fetus.
Guest User 571, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
A ban on abortion can force people together even if their relationship is abusive and neither of them want to.
SubwayRider, 30 views, 2 rebuttals, 1
+-
Well then we should also not let people go outside because they COULD get mugged and stabbed. All laws are made for the things that could happen wether you like it or not guest 558.
Guest User 581, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
This is a slippery slope fallacy. Just because an abortion ban CAN cause these things doesnt mean they will. If we made laws based on what COULD happen we would not let people drive because they COULD die while doing it.
Guest User 558, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
A three-day-old human embryo is a collection of 150 cells called a blastocyst. There are, for the sake of comparison, more than 100,000 cells in the brain of a fly. The human embryos that are destroyed in stem-cell research do not have brains, or even neurons. Consequently, there is no reason to believe they can suffer their destruction in any way at all. It is worth remembered, in this context, that when a person’s brain has died, we currently deem it acceptable to harvest his organs (provided he has donated them for this purpose) and bury him in the ground. If it is acceptable to treat a person whose brain has died as something less than a human being, it should be acceptable to treat a blastocyst as such. If you are concerned about suffering in this universe, killing a fly should present you with greater moral difficulties than killing a human blastocyst. Perhaps you think that the crucial difference between a fly and a human blastocyst is to be found in the latter’s potential to become a fully developed human being. But almost every cell in your body is a potential human being, given our recent advances in genetic engineering. Every time you scratch your nose, you have committed a Holocaust of potential human beings.
wtaylor-23, 27 views, 2 rebuttals, 1
+-
You are just a larger collection of human cells
Guest User 726, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
A preborn human is not a potential human, but an actual human. As a very simple test, leave an entity in an ideal environment. If that entity becomes an adult of its species, it is an individual organism. Sperm cells? No. Skin cells? No. Egg cells? No. Tumor cells? No. Zygote, blastocyst, embryo, fetus, infant, toddler? Yes.
Guest User 565, 1 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
The number of illegal abortions that endanger women will skyrocket if abortion is banned.
SubwayRider, 14 views, 1 rebuttals, 1
+-
So?
Guest User 566, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
If there is no way to draw an objective line on anything that is not naturally occurring, such as there being no objective line between the notions of good and bad, or good and evil, then how do pro-lifers expect an objective line to be drawn between life and non-life?
Hi, 22 views, 1 rebuttals, 1
+-
Through the use of science. It is explicitly clear through the fields of biology and embryology when a unique individual of the human species is created.
Guest User 564, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
Oh course it is. We have no moral or ethical obligation to risk our bodily integrity to gestate embryos & fetuses against our will. They don’t have special rights that no other individual human being has - the right to use another’s body against their will.
Guest User 725, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
Disagree
+-
A fundamental human right is the right to life. Abortion denies someone the right to life, therefore abortion cannot be a fundamental human right.
Guest User 580, 31 views, 1 rebuttals, 4
+-
But a fetus is not a life, because life is an abstract concept that is open to interpretation. In fact, abortion is analogous to the justice systems. We cannot draw an objective line between good and bad / right and wrong (because they are subjective concepts), but we can still sentence people for what we deem "justice".
Hi, 11 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
abortion is killing an innocent child you just shouldn't have had unprotected sex
Guest User 538, 79 views, 1 rebuttals, 4
+-
But mistakes happen, and condoms / birth control don't always work. Also what about rape and incest?
Guest User 561, 46 views, 2 rebuttals, 1
+-
You are saying that killing a person is justified if its conception was an accident? What????
Hi, 5 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
If the birth control doesn't work then that's still your fault. Say I played ball and I used measures to make the ball less likely to hit someone's window. If it does hit the window after that protective measure then I still need to pay. And if the woman is raped, the baby doesn't deserve to lose it's life because the baby isn't the person who caused the problem and the baby shouldn't be worth less because of how it was conceived.
Yo, 19 views, 1 rebuttals, 4
+-
Even if it is your fault, abortion simply kills a fetus and not a human. Bozo.
LilNasX, 2 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
Use birth control and there is no need for abortions
Guest User 728, 2 views, 0 rebuttals, 1
+-
I think abortion should be available and is good policy. But abortion is not an absolute right; it has to be weighed against whatever rights a fetus may have. The issue should be debated publicly not decided by courts.
Guest User 727, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
At the moment of conception, a new organism has formed from the diploid sperm and egg gametes of the parents. Since this new organism possesses unique, complete DNA that is different to the mother's, it cannot be said to be a part of the mother's body and exists as a separate entity, which is human and biologically no different from anyone else. Since killing innocent human beings is always wrong, and an embryo/fetus is an innocent human being, abortion is always wrong, and therefore cannot be a fundamental human right.
Guest User 577, 9 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
Parents have the natural obligation to provide nutrition and shelter to their children, and no human being should be killed except in self defense.
Guest User 572, 2 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
Babies get killed up until birth.
Guest User 568, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
Abortion is morally reprehensible and not a right, as the actions of the parents led to the creation of the fetus, so they do not have the right to kill a unique life with its own genetic code.
Guest User 567, 1 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
Killing another human being is not a human right, regardless of the location or physical traits of that human.
Guest User 563, 0 views, 0 rebuttals, 0
+-
Any argument for abortion would logically lead to infanticide and other other atrocities. Either humans have inherent value from their earliest stage, or they don't have value at all.
Guest User 548, 3 views, 0 rebuttals, 0

Login form

Login form