azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

Being alive does not automatically confer rights on to the living thing. Pigs are alive. Corn is alive. Bacteria are alive. They don't have a protected right to life.Ending life, even a human life, is permissible under other circumstances even under the legal definition of murder. Self-defense, non-negligent accidental killing, etc. are exempt so there is no rational or legal reason that abortion could not also be an exception under law (and, indeed, it is in many places that otherwise outlaw murder).
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

The concepts in question are not whether a fetus is alive, but whether it is a human life, whether those taking it know they are taking a human life, and whether they are justified in knowingly taking a human life.Most arguments stop at the first concept as people do not generally agree on what constitutes a human life (to the extent that rights are warranted). If everyone agreed that the fetus is a human life, then doctors would know that a human life is what they are taking. Whether an exception is made for this kind of taking of life depends on what we consider justification for such taking. Most abortions are not a matter of self defense, negligence, or non negligent manslaughter. While some abortions would meet current criteria for justification in taking human life, most would not. But again, we can't even get over the first hurdle.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

Yes, I know. I was being a bit fictitious and taking OP at their literal word for kicks.Honestly, though, I regard the dispute over whether the fetus is a human life as a distraction rather than an actual hurdle in the discussion. It is generally a way of sneaking in the conclusion for both sides, which is why the conversation so rarely moves beyond that point IMO. Not an uncommon practice in human behavior, really, but interesting to me in this case because of obviously blatant it is while people still maintain innocence over the matter. It's a great case study in human duplicity...
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Regardless of how you classify the unborn, if left unmolested and barring a miscarriage, they would grow up to become a person. You are doing worse than simply killing them. You are robbing them of a life that they will never have. All of the experiences, the joys of life that they will never know. Anyone who supports abortion is a monster of the worst kind, and you will answer to God for every life you have taken. There is a special place in Hell reserved for you. And whether you believe it or not, it will happen. Count on it.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

Regardless of how you classify the unborn they lack the necessary ontology to comprehend themselves or prospective loss, so there is no person for harm to adhere in. It is only in imagining an uncertain and unprovable hypothetical future person that you can conceive of harm existing, but as that person does not exist there is no person for the harm you speak of to adhere in. My point stands, and threatening me with beliefs I don't share is ineffectual, invalid argumentation.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

By every medical definition, a fetus is alive. If you abort it, it's murder. And God will deal with you whether or not you believe in Him. You've been warned and will have no excuse. It is a fearful thing to fall into the hands of an angry God. I pity you.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

Repeating yourself isn't an argument. Neither is continuing to threaten me with your fairy tale. I already covered this. Yes, it is a live. So is grass. Being alive is insufficient to be a person. Self-concept is requisite for that. A fetus lacks that. Therefore, it is not murder.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

LMMFAO you whacked out Leftist are tooooo funny ! Being alive is insufficient to be a person. Self-concept is requisite for that. A fetus lacks that. If you were not a fetus Jace how is it you came to be ?
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

Grass is alive. It is not a person. Therefore, being alive is not sufficient for personhood.The biological organism that hosts my consciousness continued to develop until it was capable of generating self-concept, at which point I came into existence.P.S. ROFLMAO your inability to think outside a rudimentary political binary is tooooo funny ! I'm not a leftist.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Jace if you were not a fetus you would never be a human on this earth. Fight it but science proves you were !
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

I was never a fetus because I am a self-conceiving consciousness that did not exist when my biological host organism was in its fetal stage. That is science. Not my fault you can't grasp it.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

ROTFFLMMFAO now Jace never was a fetus so your momma didn't bring into this world through childbirth ? Momma and Daddy had to have coitus for you to be here Jace
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

So... you are a dualist?Atheistic dualism seems to me to be a superstitious belief. But perhaps that might be just hasty generalisation.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Reductionist; I think that consciousness is a material state. In this particular case, one that does not manifest in the human organism until later in its development. Atheistic dualism strikes me as essentially an iteration of (Western) theistic narratives; the 'mind' is the 'soul' by another name.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

It is murder, no matter what you say. You will be judged for it. End of argument.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

The 'argument' ended when you failed to engage my analysis, much less repudiate it. Threatening me with your religion isn't just ineffective, it's a smokescreen for your inability to think critically.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

This is an image search for partial birth abortions.http://images.search.yahoo.com/yhs/search;_ylt=A0LEVvo.PkdZPUAA3oonnIlQ?p=Partial+birth+abortion&fr=yhs-mozilla-002&fr2=piv-web&hspart=mozilla&hsimp=yhs-002#id=4&iurl=http://nickvoss.files.wordpress.com/2012/02/partial-birth-abortion.jpg?w=610&action=close Now, Take a good look at some of those images and tell me those aren't people. PUNK!
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

They are not people, per my earlier argument which you still have not refuted.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Hey Jace how did you come to be ? Is that to confusing for you to understand ?
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Abortion can be proved illegal it is a self-incrimination to a crime. It is not illegal due to the fact it is a confession and as such can still be proved to be illegal. Why abortion can be justified as a crime is the fact the self-incrimination has not limit or no legal representation in the public. The incrimination is not controlled by the woman making the original confession.First: Gender Specific Amputation can be a confession it simple does not have the self-incrimination in place.Second: Abort means to stop as a pause. The process aborted often can be restarted. If and when the process is to be stopped indefinitely the title is changed to a termination. Here again is the Constitutional exposure to the self-incrimination being made. We all know the official stop being made is in fact a termination. Again Female Specific Amputation describes a removal of something only a woman might have medically removed. No self-incrimination no direct incrimination of the public to a possible crime.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Why is it legal to kill a child one minute before it is born but illegal one minute after
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

I think it is funny how little we need in a definition of life if we found life on Mars, compared to the definition of life we need to kill an unborn baby here on Earth.....
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Abortion regardless of the timing, is murder. The "what if a women was raped" has become a banality for you pro-choicers, and it does not justify killing the baby. If a woman claims to be suffering mentally, she can put the child up for abortion or hand it over to the government.If a woman willingly had sex, and did not choose to wear a ring, it is her mistake, there is no justification for aborting an unborn child.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

No, clinics providing safe pregnancy terminations along with counselling provision should be readily available.The only person qualified to make the decision to terminate a pregnancy is the expectant mother-to-be.It's her right to decide what does and what does not happen to her body.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: No

No it should not be illegal the choice should always be there in all societies
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Why?
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Because to do otherwise is denying a woman the right to autonomy over her own body
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

We regularly hold that it is legitimate for the state to restrict personal autonomy where a person is acting towards a body other than their own. Whether one regards the fetus at any stage as a person does not alter the fact that it is nevertheless some form of organic life, and one with a not insignificant probability of developing into what everyone would eventually identify as a person. That we could just as easily question why having protected intercourse or being abstinent are therefore not problems on the same line of reasoning, that does not actually answer the question of why it is not wrong in this case. An assertion to a right of autonomy on its own does not answer the question either because there is no right that we treat as absolute. We regularly hold violations of bodily autonomy by the state as legitimate - forced vaccinations, incarceration, etc. - which demonstrates clearly that bodily autonomy is not an incontrovertible right.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

The bottom line for me on the whole question is that I think it should always be a woman's choice no matter what different countries or states deem legal or illegal ; the fetus is indeed some form of organic life and is reliant on the woman for sustenance over which it has no right , should the so called rights of the fetus trump those of the woman ?
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

I support legalized abortion, and I have my rationale. I'm just not sure what yours is. Why should this particular right by absolute? There is literally no other right that we treat after that fashion, so why should this be such an exceptional case?
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

I stated my reasons as in it should always be a woman's choice to make the choice regardless of what you or I think she is the one carrying the fetus she should be the one to decide whether to abort or not , so my rationale is that it's a woman's body that carries the fetus so therefore it should be her choice whether to abort or not regardless of what others think on the matter . There are in fact more than one absolute right as recognised by international human rights laws why should this be any different ?DescriptionArticle 7 ICCPR Freedom from torture and other cruel, inhuman or degrading treatment or punishmentArticles 8(1) & 8(2) ICCPR Freedom from slavery and servitudeArticle 11 ICCPR Freedom from imprisonment for inability to fulfil a contractual obligationArticle 15 ICCPR Prohibition against the retrospective operation of criminal lawsArticle 16 ICCPR Right to recognition before the lawInternational human rights law recognises that few rights are absolute and reasonable limits may be placed on most rights and freedoms. Absolute rights, however, are distinguishable from non-absolute rights .Absolute rights cannot be limited for any reason. No circumstance justifies a qualification or limitation of absolute rights. Absolute rights cannot be suspended or restricted, even during a declared state of emergency.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Your rationale is incomplete because you never explain why proximity to the fetus necessitates your conclusion. We regularly permit and even endorse the exercise of state or other authority over the immediate bodily autonomy of persons in pursuit of superseding interests. It is therefore unclear why the woman's greater proximity to an adjacent body should necessarily confer to her an absolute right of choice against all possible competing interests. There is a difference between an absolute right in theory and an absolute right in practice. The ICCPR, like all agreements of its kind, is effectively idealistic posturing. "[It's] widely formulated reservations [...] essentially render ineffective all Covenant rights which would require any change in national law to ensure compliance [...]. No real international rights or obligations have thus been accepted" [1]. Because they are purely human constructions, rights actually exist only insofar as they are practiced and there is no absolute right in this sense. (Notably, even if there were this would not mean that the right to an abortion is or should also be an absolute right.)Nor would the existence of any absolute right necessitate that it should exist. Your appeal to governmental authority does appropriately identify the body with the most power to actualize rights, but confuses this to mean that the rights which government chooses to actualize therefore should be actualized. While a governmental authority may hypothetically have the requisite capacity to enforce an absolute right, that does not mean that it's doing so is defensible. Therefore, even if the ICCPR (or similar document) represented absolute rights in practice it would not constitute a rationale that those rights should exist absolutely (or more generally that the idea of an absolute right is sound).It is mere tautology that absolute rights cannot be restricted, but whether absolute rights do or should exist are other questions entirely. You have not really begun to answer either. [1] Hum. Rts. Comm. General Comment No. 24 (52), para. 11, 18–19, U.N. Doc. CCPR/C/21/Rev.1/Add.6 (1994)
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

A woman should not be denied the right to control her own body proximity of the fetus would deny her this if abortion was illegal .In my initial comments in this argument I said abortion should be legal in all societies , I believe it should be a woman's decision to do what she wants to do with her own body regarding abortion ; if abortion was illegal in all societies that would grant the fetus rights which trump those of the woman and indeed grant the fetus an absolute right denied the woman ?I was not appealing to governmental authority I was countering your statement regarding absolute rights, I can only do that by citing what are deemed and agreed to be absolute rights under international law .International human rights law recognises that few rights are absolute and reasonable limits may be placed on most rights and freedoms. Absolute rights, however, are distinguishable from non-absolute rights according to International human rights which is why I gave the list of what are deemed absolute rights under international law . Absolute rights cannot be limited for any reason. No circumstance justifies a qualification or limitation of absolute rights. Absolute rights cannot be suspended or restricted, even during a declared state of emergency.The bottom line is that under international law there are what are termed absolute rights ,so yes they do exist and that's what I stated initially which answered your question .
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

A woman should not be denied the right to control her own body proximity of the fetus would deny her this if abortion was illegal.You keep claiming this, but still have not presented a coherent argument for it. As I already explained you have an incomplete rationale because you have not shown why her carrying the fetus necessarily confers an absolute right to her. You have not addressed this response, so it stands and you therefore have no basis for your position.In my initial comments in this argument I said abortion should be legal in all societies [...] if abortion was illegal in all societies that would grant the fetus rights which trump those of the women and indeed grant the fetus an absolute right denied the woman.Presenting an opposite extreme does not make your position any less extreme, or any less unfounded. Even if it were plausible that all societies would make abortion illegal, on the meager basis of your argumentation that would not be obviously problematic (only by your conviction). I was not appealing to governmental authority I was countering your statement regarding absolute rights, I can only do that by citing what are deemed and agreed to be absolute rights under international law .I recognize why you brought it up; I was merely being clear about what your observation could and could not get you (which, really, is nothing at all).International human rights law recognises that few rights are absolute and reasonable limits may be placed on most rights and freedoms. [...] Absolute rights cannot be suspended or restricted, even during a declared state of emergency.[...] The bottom line is that under international law there are what are termed absolute rights ,so yes they do exist and that's what I stated initially which answered your question .This is a completely non-responsive reassertion of your claim, which I have already repudiated at length. You haven not addressed my counter-evidence, nor my counter-rationale. Until you do, both stand and your argument falls. There is no such thing as an absolute right in practice, even if it exists in theory. Even if there were such a thing, that does not mean there should be. Even if there were such a thing and should be such a thing, that would not even mean that abortion should also be an absolute right. I rest my case until such time as you actually bother to address it.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

My position is certainly clear and the argument is coherent ; I stated before that a woman should have complete autonomy over her own body and what she chooses to do with it , it is up to her entirely how she deals with the fetus ; the fetus is reliant on the woman for sustenance over which it has no right .The bottom line is that the choice should always be there for women in all societies anything else is a form of tyranny .My observation was not put forward to get me anything but merely to correct you as you seemed to assume that there were no absolute rights when in fact there are under international law .My claim was that there are what is termed absolute rights under international law , you merely gave your opinion regarding the matter which has absolutely no bearing on what are termed absolute rights under international law .Your counter evidence and counter claim are merely your opinion and have absolutely no bearing on what lawmakers term absolute rights so I dismiss them totally as your rationale is faulty to say the least ; you childishly state even if there was such a thing as an absolute right that doesn't mean there should be and abortion should not be and this is just because you say so .Your points were indeed addressed your failure to recognise that is something you need to work on .
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Yes you expressed this and I disagree so the conclusion is unfair .No it's not . You actually need to refer to the last post where I brought this point up as in my original statement on the issue ......The bottom line for me on the whole question is that I think it should always be a woman's choice no matter what different countries or states deem legal or illegal ; the fetus is indeed some form of organic life and is reliant on the woman for sustenance over which it has no right , should the so called rights of the fetus trump those of the woman ? ............This is at the top of the debate so how you make out its new is beyond me .You are now comparing the reliance of minors to those of a fetus , also you now unfairly claim that I'm saying reliance means one has no rights ,where did I state that ?The UN prints many reports so your appeal to authority is meant to achieve what ? You keep denying the existence of absolute rights while international and European law states the complete opposite to what you claim and have charters of absolute rights , so maybe you could take a case against both bodies and argue your case about theory and practice and plead with them to change the term absolute to suit you ?It's rather amusing you make a remark about critical thinking skills while you seem to fall short in this category .Regarding absolute rights , yes I think abortion should be one I've stated my reasons ad nauseum and connections have been proven as in my statement from the start that a woman should have full autonomy over her own body .That was not an ad hominem it was a genuine comment on your failure to recognise what I actually said , instead of what you think I said .
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Why do the rights of the baby impose responsibilities on the parents after it's outside the mom, but not before?
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Well abortion is illegal where I'm from and also in many other countries so maybe that's something you need to ask your own lawmakers
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

I asked you and you said to ask them. I asked and they said they don't know. Must be a question with no answer...
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Yes , I said ask them as I don't presume to know the minds of American lawmakers , by your own admittance you don't either as you claimed they don't know , so yes it seems your conclusion is accurate based on American law anyway
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Well, I pressed them in the answer and they told me that they don't presume to know your mind and that if I want your answer to the question, I should ask you.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

I'm deeply honoured that American lawmakers would deem me an appropriate authority to hold forth on American law , I would graciously acknowledge that their opinion on such matters would surely be the most profitable route for any further enquiries
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

If you say you believe something should be legal, you can't refer to lawmakers to explain why you personally think so. You cannot appeal to authority on matters of your own reasoning, or lack thereof.PS. You spelled honored wrong.
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

Why I think what I think on the matter I've gone through several times and indeed you've heard my opinions before on the matter , I'm not appealing to authority as I've explained my position ad nauseum on CD and I've no intention of doing so again .Ps . so I did , 👮👮 those pesky American spelling police are everywhere 😢
Debate: Should abortion be illegal?
Side: Yes

I've been on here for a few years now. I've explained the underlying reasons behind my positions multiple times. Do you suppose that next time you ask me to support my position with reasons, I can just refer you to previous, unspecified times that I supported my position with reasons? If you've already answered this question, or if someone in a position of authority has answered this question, you can just disregard this post.