forum Debate. Debate. Debate.

Started March 14, 2019 by Deleted user

tune

Edit topic

okay, unpopular opinions here..
1.maybe women aren't just baby-makers!1!1!1!11!
2.people are allowed to have the sexytimes for fun (astounding, I know)

1. consent to sex isn't consent to a frickin (stronger language omitted) CHILD!!!!

Sure, but I still think it’s more intelligent to prepare for the worst case scenario so the baby doesn’t end up ruining your life than to just walk in carelessly without considering the possibilities that maybe, your little “fun times” might result in some not-so-fun times. Again, just an opinion. Also, I still see no reason how being allowed to abuse your baby-making system for fun justifies killing off the child…?

I apologize for my weird ways of trying to avoid using the word “sex”, for some reason looking at it makes me feel a bit sick so I try to hint at it instead, for my stomach’s sake. I’m sorry if it leads to any confusion.

It’s not a baby-making system. Sure, it can make a baby, but some people also like to use it for pleasure. And it’s not like any protection is 100% foolproof. You could take all the precautions and still get pregnant.
And it’s not “killing off” a child, because a child is someone who’s already been born. At the point that most abortions are made at, the fetus is barely developed. They can’t think, or feel pain, or anything. Killing would imply otherwise.

Well killing basically means “to end a life”, and the fetus is alive from the moment of conception, so why not use “killing”? And even if it can’t feel the pain yet, that doesn’t mean you’re allowed to take away its right to life. It’s still a human, even if it resembles cottage cheese. Newborn babies closely resemble potatoes but that doesn’t make them less human. And last but not least, it is a baby making system. It can be used for other reasons, but that’s not its intention. Again, It’s called a reproduction system, not a pleasure system that also has reproductive abilities.

(I have to go after this. Bye guys! I hope you all sleep well and have a good day/night. <3)

Man Nutella you have progressed so much. I am really proud of you.

political debates are my strong point although I usually end up pissing people off because I am highly opinionated and don’t give up without really strong evidence

I can approve that.

I prefer debates about wildlife or philosophy, I understand both those things.

I prefer non-political debates because politics are stupid.
Here's a potential topic:
Thoughts on bootlegs of shows being out on YouTube?

I think they're good. I've watched the Heathers bootleg but I would give my right arm to see Heathers in person. I don't think they're taking away business from Broadway or anything. Just don't try to bootleg a youth production. That's a jerk move.

What about Illegal Heathers?
I agree. Some people can't afford to pay for tickets/lodging/a trip all the way to NYC or where ever a show is.

Well killing basically means “to end a life”, and the fetus is alive from the moment of conception, so why not use “killing”? And even if it can’t feel the pain yet, that doesn’t mean you’re allowed to take away its right to life. It’s still a human, even if it resembles cottage cheese. Newborn babies closely resemble potatoes but that doesn’t make them less human. And last but not least, it is a baby making system. It can be used for other reasons, but that’s not its intention. Again, It’s called a reproduction system, not a pleasure system that also has reproductive abilities.

(I have to go after this. Bye guys! I hope you all sleep well and have a good day/night. <3)

But it's not alive from the moment of conception. It has no brain, heartbeat, consciousness, or anything. As I said before it's a clump of cells that has no awareness of what it is or can/will be.
It is not a baby making system. The female reproductive system has WAY more uses to a woman's life than just producing offspring. I would also like to say that reducing women to just 'baby makers' and taking away their rights to their own life and their own careers/habits/etc is so insulting that I'm literally disgusted right now. A woman is not less of a woman because she cannot/will not have children and it should not be up to the opinions of others to what she does/doesn't do with her body.

She doesn't have a right to the baby's life. Her say in the matter starts before she gets pregnant, taking the necessary precautions, acknowledging and accepting the possibility of a child, or even not doing the baby-making thing without the intent of making babies. What she does with her body is completely her choice, but once there's another living, growing human involved, it's not her right anymore.

So a woman has no right over the fetus' life? The fetus that she is creating? The fetus that is literally leeching life off of her? The fetus that will become her baby? That kind of thinking is wild. If you take that into account a woman would have no right to what happens to the fetus after it is born. she wouldn't be able to choose what school it goes to, what it eats for dinner, what clothes it will wear, etc…
It is her body. She gets to decide.

Imma just quote this because no one responded to it: "Imagine you got a splinter because you played in some old trees and your parent told you that you couldn't remove it because you need to suffer the consequences of what you did. Would that be fair? Would it be fair if it got infected and ruined your entire body and you suffered until it was flushed out of your body? Is that fair? Then you'd have to deal with the repercussions of the splinter and it's infection that rained hell on your body for the rest of your life. All because of an accident. How is that fair?

You know….skin cells contain life but no one gets lynched for exfoliating.

It's a splinter… It won't develop into a living, breathing, thinking thing that will have the ability to impact the world.

They're skin cells. They also won't have the chance to affect the world.

They're skin cells. They also won't have the chance to affect the world.

That girl in that impoverished community may affect the world, but we don't care about her, right? Same with that boy killed by police because they thought he was reaching for a weapon. Some, not all, pro-lifers are actually pro-fetus not pro-life.

They're skin cells. They also won't have the chance to affect the world.

That girl in that impoverished community may affect the world, but we don't care about her, right? Same with that boy killed by police because they thought he was reaching for a weapon. Some, not all, pro-lifers are actually pro-fetus not pro-life.

But I do care about them and there are plenty of other people that do as well. And that doesn't have anything to do with it. Because apparently abortion is oh so different than murder and therefore has nothing to do with living children or murdered children.

If politicians really cared about children, they’d fund schools, or pass gun laws, or work on improving impoverished areas. They don’t, because they don’t really care. They care about limiting what women can and cannot do with their own bodies.

Well…I don't know about anyone else, but I'm not a politician. And I don't agree with a lot of stuff they say.

It's a splinter… It won't develop into a living, breathing, thinking thing that will have the ability to impact the world.

It's a grouping of cells that has a 70% of being naturally aborted by the female body by menstruation.

They're skin cells. They also won't have the chance to affect the world.

Neither do babies. They don't do anything.
Just because something might do something doesnt mean we have to force people to change their lives to accommodate that possibility. As moony said maybe fund schools to support the children in impoverished areas so they have a chance to make a difference. No one is born with the danm cure for cancer already in their brain.

example: I have what is considered a genius level IQ, highly capable of 'changing the world'. I graduated high school as a valedictorian and with the 3rd highest GPA in my class. I went to med school. But instead of curing cancer or saving lives I decided I wanted to be a chef with a sommelier accommodation. That's right, my occupation is to feed people while getting them super drunk off of expensive wine.

That argument is completely invalid. Take care of the children here and now, not the possible ones that only will continue to add to thousands that suffer because the government cares more about what women do in their down time than the millions that are homeless and starving.

I do agree that everyone needs to pay more attention to them and I think adoption should be a bigger thing and also that the system in the US sucks but I also think that if you aren't okay with having a kid then you shouldn't have sex. So I feel like that's the first spot where we all differ

What about Illegal Heathers?
I agree. Some people can't afford to pay for tickets/lodging/a trip all the way to NYC or where ever a show is.

That doesn't mean we should effectively rob them of what they could have made. It's a disrespect to the artist if you attempt to partake of their work without giving them their dues in return.