azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Says who? if this was the case wouldn't abortion be illegal? It's not because that statement you made is an ideal. To force a woman to go through with a pregnancy, is unjust treatment of already living citizens. Fetuses don't even so much as have a birth certificate, they are not people, so they are not subject to the laws of people.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Says anyone who knows and understands the applicability of the Constitution... and as far as abortion being (for now) legal... it is that very basis (violation of the Constitution) that we are challenging Roe on. There is no requirment for a birth certificate in our Constitution either.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Well that may be the case, but as far as the rules are going out and calling for rights. The woman does have the right to abortion. And my opinion which is what this question really asks, is that of the woman's right to choose.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Did you forget that this is a debate site and that abortion is a controversial issue and that the fucking debate can't be won with well it's legal so it's a right?"
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

That was mostly me saying there's no reason to even argue with me specifically. I have my opinion and it will always apparently differ from your opinion. And so long as women want to put up the fight it will remain legal, no one can overturn a woman's ultimate decision to get rid of the child she doesn't want. If the law is turned in favor, abortions won't cease, their will just be penalties for it, then the government will see that it's a war that can't be won. Like they are seeing with marijuana, like they saw with alcohol.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

" That was mostly me saying there's no reason to even argue with me specifically. I have my opinion and it will always apparently differ from your opinion...." So you are on a debate website fighting the opponents of abortion by telling us that debate with you is futile. What's the word for that? It rhymes with Rolling.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

So you are on a debate website fighting the opponents of abortion by telling us that debate with you is futile.I'm on a debate that asked my stance on being pro life or pro choice, and why. I as disputed and I answered. THe disputes were based on rules while the debate was based on opinion.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Hey Q, maybe you should give it to him in Spanish since he disputes your English. Muah. ;)
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

I'm on a debate that asked my stance on being pro life or pro choice, and why. I as disputed and I answered. THe disputes were based on rules while the debate was based on opinion.  Care to try that in English?
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Mere disagreement with you does not mean being wrong. .
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

You proud of that? A momentary lapse in my diction and spelling for you to basically call me an idiot. At least I'm not preaching right and wrong on an opinion debate.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Our laws say that killing a child in the womb in some cases is a murder and in other cases (like when the mom just wants it dead) it's not. It's not a matter of opinion. It is an inconsistency in our laws. It's a matter of fact.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Our laws say that killing a child in the womb in some cases is a murder and in other cases (like when the mom just wants it dead) it's not. It's not a matter of opinion that is an inconsistency in our laws. It's a matter of fact.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Read the debate title and get back to me about whether or not this is opinion.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Read it again. My comments were not about the debate titleOur laws say that killing a child in the womb in some cases is a murder and in other cases (like when the mom just wants it dead) it's not. It's not a matter of opinion that is an inconsistency in our laws. It's a matter of fact.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

You said this debate wasn't one made out of pure opinion. I stated my stance on the issue, and you replied to me so I replied back.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

http://www.createdebate.com/debate/show/ Quocalimar_versus_Chuz_on_the_issue_of_abortion_Who_is_right
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

women shouldnt deal with a baby they didnt want to have because they underwent a traumatizing event while having to deal with the fact the babys father is a rapist and add financial problems with the chance of dying while giving birth (especially if they were a teenager). i swear if anyone says its because of "what she was wearing" or "she shouldnt accept drinks) tell that to children that were raped and got pregnant. do you realize women get their periods usually on the age of 10-13 some even get them younger. and even if they were drunk/accepted a drink did you consider they were having a good time at a party with your best friends and a person gives them a drink then the next thing you know you have to take care of a child for the rest of your life if you survive? did you ever consider teenager s dont have the best decision making skills? in a nutshell pro choice >>>
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Basically all the reasons just stated. Pro-choice. A woman should have the rights to her own body. The thing inside of her is a fetus, and not a baby. She should be able to choose to get rid of it in my opinion.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

It is a baby, but mom still has rights. I support the sanctity of choice. .
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Do children not have rights? Our Constitution says they do... or at least should.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

A fetus has not attained personhood so no they not not have rights under the constitution unless the fetus develops past a certain period.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

I disagree and that has been the crux of just about any abortion debate. We have laws that say both that the unjust killing of a child in the womb is murder. (That is a legal recognition of their personhood whether you like it or not) and we also have laws that make an exception to allow for abortions. Regardless, your claim that a child in the fetal stage of their life is not recognized as a legal 'person' is false.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

I assume those laws you refer to are relevant to cases of double homicides where both the fetus and the mother is killed. This is a different situation because consent was never taken from the mother to engage in such action. You fail to grasp my point. My argument was not that the fetal stage is not entitled to rights but rather that there is certain period during which rights are entitled. Even the U.S Supreme Court has argued, using medical facts that the fetus is not a person unless it reaches a certain point. Science would describe the fetus as a mass of cells undergoing development but which has not attained the stage of personhood.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

You assume incorrectly.  "A Missouri truck driver is one of the few people charged under Ohio's 4-year-old fetal-homicide law. Ernest L. Westerberg, 52, was charged with two counts of vehicular homicide Saturday in Friday's Interstate 74 crash in Green Township.A 52-year-old teacher from Green Township and her 20-year-old daughter's unborn fetus died in the three-vehicle accident. Two women remained hospitalized Sunday.Before 1996, Mr. Westerberg would have been charged with only one count of vehicular homicide. But that changed when a Middletown man lobbied to modify state law, which originally did not consider a fetus a person until it took its first breath. And like I said, the legal definition says ANY stage of development.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Again, I fail to see a substantive argument. Only the mother has the right to terminate the life of her fetus. No one else has that right so you actually did me the favor of proving my previous arguments. In all those cases you mention, the life of the fetus was taken A) during the commission of a homicide to the mother and B) without the consent of the mother outside the scope of abortion.Lastly, what legal definition are you referring to? Because if that was the case then abortion would be a crime and it is not.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Read it again, Sayyad. The MOTHER survived and the driver was charged with killing the child and another woman. Again, the biological mother survived.If you want to clutch at straws and try to convince yourself that these laws do not support our claims that an abortion kills a child or violates their rights? Go right ahead. I expected that you would do so. But, we know that the precedent has been set and we will not waste the chance to point out these contradictions in these laws and legal definitions to the Supreme Court when we get the chance to do so.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Yet again, you fail to realize the core of my arguments. CONSENT WAS NEVER GIVEN BY THE MOTHER TO TAKE THE LIFE OF THE FETUS SO HENCE THE ACT ITSELF IS A CRIME BECAUSE ONLY THE MOTHER HAS THAT RIGHT. Secondly, those articles failed to mention what stages the fetus were at the time of their deaths.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

This is straight from the law:  "the term `unborn child' means a child in utero, and the term `child in utero' or `child, who is in utero' means a member of the species homo sapiens, at ANY stage of development, who is carried in the womb.'." Did you note the word ANY there? The woman's consent is only relevant when she is seeking an abortion. Something which the law (for now) makes an exception for.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

And if consent is not given then it becomes murder. Isn't that why this statute was created?Lastly, I fail to see your argument because if lets assume that the fetus was a child, this clause was passed so that it may be applied to situations in which consent of the mother was not given. That is, if the life of the fetus is taken at any stage by another person without the consent of the mother. It does not address the issue of whether or not the fetus is a person. It only addresses the issue of scenarios where consent of the mother is not given. This clause addresses consent, not the question of personhood.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

And if consent is not given then it becomes murder. Isn't that why this statute was created?No. Because even a mother can be charged if she performs an abortion on herself. That is, if the life of the fetus is taken at any stage. It does not address the issue of whether or not the fetus is a  person  .When the charge is murder for killing one, you have to consider what the legal definition of murder is.Murder is the unlawful killing of one person by another. So you see, the charges themselves speak to the 'personhood' of the victim.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

To begin with, a mother cannot be charged even if she performs an abortion on herself. Various means of abortion includes using abortion pills and morning after pills which would require the mother to ingest the pill so yes through this process she is performing it on herself. No where in the laws define this as a crime.Would you agree that murder is the intentional and unjustifiable taking of one human life by another?
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

"To begin with, a mother cannot be charged even if she performs an abortion on herself. "There are too many of these to list, Say.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

You seem to forget that all these women were charged because they failed to performed their abortions within the specified period of time before it attains personhood. And so goes for the rest of your list as well.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

You said, and I quote: "to begin with, a mother cannot be charged even if she performs an abortion on herself."
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

And if you read my prior arguments, a person with logic would know I was referring to the specified period of time.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Why would consent only be relevant to abortion when the statute you quoted relates to the absence of the mother's consent as it relates to homicides?
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

(That is a legal recognition of their personhood whether you like it or not) and we also have laws that make an exception to allow for abortionsAnd that starts at a certain part of their devolpment but of course you wouldn't want to tell us that.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Straight from the law:   "the term `unborn child' means a child in utero, and the term `child in utero' or `child, who is in utero' means a member of the species homo sapiens, at ANY stage of development, who is carried in the womb.'." Take note of the word ANY in that definition.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

doubtful that's even a real law if it was why is abortion still legal then genius?
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Like I said (and if you followed the link you would know)The lawmakers made an exception to allow for abortions to continue despite the obvious duplicity in the law.Just like they did with Roe, They were trying to have it both ways. But it brings us closer than ever to a Constitutional challenge to Roe... and here's a little secret... shhhhhh. They intended to do that.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

How then do you explain the laws that we have - laws which make the illegal killing of a child in the womb a crime of murder?
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

looks like the troll is getting desperate for points.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

It looks like the attention whore is tired of being ignored.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

you're getting tired of being ignored already?
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

fetus has no rights, it's not a human, it hypothetically could be one... but it's not.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

A child has the right to live as the mother does. You are a murderer and your argument is invalidated.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

I believe it is a person's right to choose what grows in their body, or does not grow in their body. Obligation only comes after it is born, not before.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

You believe it is right to kill a baby? Okay.Knocks nomeansno out and puts it in a prison where no one will ever see it again. You die in prison.That's your logic.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

You believe it is right to kill a baby? Okay.Knocks nomeansno out and puts it in a prison where no one will ever see it again. You die in prison.That's your logic.I don't think anything I've read here counts as logic.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Women's body, women's choice, there is nothing to talk about.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

it is not the woman's body she chooses to destroy, it the life of another growing inside of her.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Pro life supporters certainly seem to care about life a lot more before it gets out of the womb for people who generally argue against universal health care. Also, whether or not to keep a baby is the woman's choice. Not a protesting Texan's choice.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Your hypocrisy is hilarious that you trip over your own words. You are just solely searching for a sorry excuse to kill a baby. Your arguments are invalid.Baby lives matter
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Until it can survive outside of the womb on it's on it is not a baby it is a fetus. It is also a parasite because it relies on the mother for life. Don't like abortions don't get one, but don't take away a woman's right to choose especially if you don't want your rights taken away.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

So if I stab a pregnant woman in the stomach 1 week before she was gonna give birth, I would just be killing a fetus, right?
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

I am only against abortions past the 2nd trimester. I do not like using "pro-choice", as it implies that those who disagree with me on abortion are not supportive of choice, namely of women's choice. Moreover, it wrongly describes my ethical and political philosophy.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Does a woman have the right to an abortion under the U.S. Constitution? If someone is a strict constructionist who interprets the Constitution word for word, the sanction for abortion is given under the Fourteenth Amendment. The Fourteenth Amendment of our U.S. Constitution defines a citizen “a citizen” at birth. If a woman is carrying a fetus in the womb, the U.S. Constitution does not designate the fetus as “a citizen.” It would take an amendment to the U.S. Constitution to declare a fetus a citizen. You have to be born in order to be recognized as a citizen. Therefore, a woman does have the right to choose. A fetus inside the womb is not designated as a citizen according to the U.S. Constitution so by default is not entitled to life, liberty, or prosperity. You have to be born in order to be endowed with those privileges. To conclude, neither the Federal government nor any of the States can deny a woman the right to choose. If abortion is murder, abortion would have been terminated years ago due to the cruel and unusual punishment clause under the Eighth Amendment. Again, proof that a fetus is not recognized as a citizen of the United States of America.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Abortion should be entirely up to what the to-be mother is. I feel that if she doesn't have a say if her child is going to die or not would be unjust. Second, rape is mainly the reason why one would want to kill their child. Abortion takes place when the baby is at a developing stage. It has not taken any life form yet, so it should not hurt anyone emotionally.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

I support the sanctity of choice. .
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Much of pro-life is based upon disinformation. Fake abortion clinics outnumber real ones 3-1.https://counterhate.com/blog/we-made-google-take-action-on-anti-abortion-fake-clinics/
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

No truth to my statements? If you won't even accept left center feminist frequency and probably center bias center for countering digital hate then you are so extreme right there is no convincing you.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

If you won't even accept left center feminist frequency and probably center bias center for countering digital hate then you are so extreme right there is no convincing you.Bruh, that was barely even a sentence.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Yeah all he likes to do is spew bs. That's why all his arguments are insane, hypocritical and very biased. I will continue to defy feminazis like him and I will destroy him with the truth and only the truth.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Your arguments are invalidated 100%. You have no truth within you. I've won this debate. Cry about it.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

"If you won't even accept left center feminist frequency and probably center bias center for countering digital hate then you are so extreme right there is no convincing you." - "sciencerules" the hypocritical strawman loving snowflake (Opponent on the wrong side)"Truly truly I say unto you, if ye are not reborn from water and of the spirit, thou shalt not enter thy Kingdom of God." - Jesus Christ, the Son of God (Our Savior who is on the righteous side)"If you won't accept that real women have gone through abortions and have regretted it, then you are clearly a human being without a conscience and because of this, pro lifers are even more justified to fight for baby lives because yes, they do matter. You clearly are extremely leftist and you are clearly ignorant and retarded. There is no common sense within you and you clearly are sexist towards men. You are a hypocrite and you are clearly hateful. There is no truth within you. You have proven time and time and again that you would rather support pedophiles and immoral toxic ideologies rather than defending the lives of human beings, especially developing newborns. What does this say about yourself? That you are no longer behaving humanely but rather, inhumanely. You will be committed to Arkham Asylum for life because you just proved yourself to be a feminazi. Nazis were leftists FYI snowflake. Cry me a river and get over it." - Dr. Batman (Follower of Jesus who is also on the righteous side.)Here are four women who have gone through abortions. One or a few will say they've regretted it. None of my arguments have strawman to it. You on the other hand? Yep. You are what you sew. That's how your arguments are invalidated 100% flawlessly.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zgvOtrBbYE0 God prevails!
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Further abuse from "sciencerules" hateful hypocrisy is that he claims he is against hate, yet he doesn't allow the lives of babies to go on. That is pure hypocrisy. Yes, you have zero truth and you belong in prison for life because you are a pro murderer. Baby lives matter. Knocks "sciencerules" out with 777 punches & kicks and puts him in Death Row Prison for life. His so called link is hypocritical and full of leftist ideologies that are not fruitful towards this debate at all. "Claiming to be countering hate and yet you are promoting the death of developing human beings." Yes, I will continue to destroy you with these truths. Your humiliation is only beginning because I am your worst nightmare.You were once a fetus too and I will say now, "sciencerules", your life doesn't matter because you've dehumanized every possible newborn to come into this world. They've done nothing to you. But you have made them suffer and you will pay for your sins.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Even when I first joined this website before you joined I could tell this was going to be difficult. Why? Because people wouldn't trust the best sources on the Internet like Snopes. If someone is that extreme right, it is almost like a point of no return. I don't think I can convince them. Yet, I feel the worst I thing I can do is simply give up. Then, more and more extreme right views could spread unchallenged.The two links about fake abortion clinics are relevant and useful. They show just how dangerous and far pro-life people will take their stance. "Anti-abortion extremists are considered a current domestic terrorist threat by the United States Department of Justice."Pro-life takes away all choice and autonomy from women. Keep them barefoot, pregnant, and in the kitchen is the misogynists' creed. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-abortion_violence
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Life

Once again using wikipedia. Not a reliable source. All false news comes from you. You have no truth. Your arguments are invalidated.
Debate: Pro-life vs. Pro-choice
Side: Pro-Choice

Wikipedia is usually a good source now. Wikipedia was unreliable at first, but scientists cleaned it up pretty good. It is center bias just for starters.