Abortion

You have yet again ignored my point about the disabled, even when I have specifically referenced it. My point is that the disabled can't survive on their own, and neither can the fetus, yet the disabled person is valued, and the fetus is not. Please finally address this point as opposed to ignoring it. ' I won't supply a full argument to think as I think if I did so, we would just be going back to where we were before. As we have discussed this previously.' You seem to drop many points saying 'we have discussed this previously, so if you have anything to add, feel free to' I have sufficiently rebutted your points on this topic, yet you ignore my points and drop the topic, which is an obvious sign that you do not have a response. You did this with the disabled example, as mentioned above. 'I agree with your point that people should take responsibility for their actions. But, I do still think that they should have the option of abortion.' Then explain why! You simply state your opinion but never back it up with logic or reasoning. ' As I believe that it should be the mother's choice if she wants an abortion or not. I am not saying we should kill all of the homeless.' Again, you fail to explain why. 'If you don't want to kill a child and the mother doesn't want the child then, what do you suggest?' Adoption. Preferably, the mother would take responsibility for her irresponsible actions, but I would much rather prefer adoption to murder. 'I still stick to my original opinion that it should be the woman/girl's choice of what to do. I, however, do not think this should apply to all people. To me, it should apply to mothers who don't want to be mothers.' I feel like a broken record here, but why? You simply state your opinion, but never say why. ' Did you read my answer where I clearly stated my opinion on this matter?' You did not clearly state your opinion on this matter. You said this: 'Con goes on to say that I can't choose two options and that last time I choose option two. I would like to disagree with that and say that I used a mixture of option two and a completely different one. I don't think it is fair for Con to try and limit my options.' You haven't explained the 'completely different one', and because you have wasted so many rounds incorrectly assuming you have explained it, now I don't have the opportunity to respond to the third option. (Which does not exist BTW) 'The next topic was the matter of the mother carrying a child for nine months. I asked this question in context. I suggest you go back and read this in the context it was written in.' And I answered appropriately. My point was that a fetus is a human being, and if it was being killed I was going to speak out. 'Con goes on to recap what has happened so far. It seems that Con is trying to point out everything bad that has happened and none of the other content of this debate.' And I will recap again, as if you think I am omitting key points, then correct me. On the issue of the fetus' survival out side of the womb: You ignored my point about the disabled, while I rebutted you with the disabled example. On the significance of human emotions in relation to the worth of the fetus: I provide you with a hypothetical example as absurd as yours when you imagine a world without emotions, therefore proving your hypothetical example is not relevant. I then claim that human lives are worth more than emotions in the context of abortions, and you ignore this. On the responsibility of the parent to not have sex if they were not ready for the consequences: You say it should be their choice, and then claim there is nothing more to say on the matter. I explain why I consider this problematic, namely that they know the risks and should take responsibility. You completely ignore me yet again. On the issue of not wanting a child to grow up in poverty: You claim you do not want a child to grow up in poverty, but fail to show how killing them is better for them. I ask you why not kill all the homeless if you feel this way, you do not explain why but simply say: ' I am not saying we should kill all of the homeless.' On the issue of me preventing your choice of a third option (in relation to views on abortion): You say your view is a mix of option 2 and another completely different view, yet you repeatedly avoid telling me what that option is. Usually, the central topic in the abortion debate is the fetus' worth, and whether it deserves the same amount of rights as us. You have not once even attempted to disprove me on this, not once. You haven't explained how it isn't worth a human life, only that you don't think it is. The reason that the list above seems extremely one sided is that this debate so far has been. I'm getting really sick and tired of your simply ignoring my points, round after round. If you can't answer questions and rebut points, why are you on this site? Instead of rebutting me, you have simply ignored my points over and over and over again, and unfortunately it has created a rather aggravating debate, as the points I have put lots of thought and effort in are disregarded and completely ignored. You have one, final round to write. I am hoping that you disprove and rebut all the points I have made, as otherwise there is no point in even going on this website.Please try and redeem yourself, you have one final chance, and then the debate is over.