azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

So the laws say that a woman should not use her body for the purpose of prositution. So would you say that the laws are infringing upon the body of the woman? Check up the details of science. A human embryo or fetus is an organism of one species (Homo sapiens) living in the uterine cavity of an organism of the same species (Homo sapiens) and deriving its nourishment from the mother (is metabolically dependent on the mother). This homospecific relationship is an obligatory dependent relationship, but not a parasitic relationship. A parasite is an invading organism -- coming to parasitize the host from an outside source. A human embryo or fetus is formed from a fertilized egg -- the egg coming from an inside source, being formed in the ovary of the mother from where it moves into the oviduct where it may be fertilized to form the zygote -- the first cell of the new human being. When a parasite invades a host, the host will usually respond by forming antibodies in response to the somatic antigens (molecules comprising the body of the parasite) or metabolic antigens (molecules secreted or excreted by the parasite) of the parasite. Parasitism usually involves an immunological response on the part of the host. When the human embryo or fetus attaches to and invades the lining tissue of the mother's uterus, the lining tissue responds by surrounding the human embryo and does not cut it off from the mother, but rather establishes a means of close contact (the placenta) between the mother and the new human being.New evidence, presented by Beer and Billingham in their article, "The Embryo as a Transplant" (Scientific American, April, 1974), indicates that the mother does react to the presence of the embryo by producing humoral antibodies, but they suggest that the trophoblast -- the jacket of cells surrounding the embryo -- blocks the action of these antibodies and therefore the embryo or fetus is not rejected. This reaction is unique to the embryo-mother relationship.Abortion was and is considered murder in some countries and states so what are you talking about. What about in Wade vs. Roe when Jane Roe was charged by the DA for attempted murder because she wanted to commit an abortion. She claimed she was raped but the truth is she was never. She had consensual sex. That is the root towards the leglaization of abortion before it was and is still known as murder in some countries. You say a fetus is not legally considered a human life but perhaps you should read up on the case Webster vs. Reproducitve Health Servies in which the U.S Supreme Court in their ruling concluded that life begins at conception which means that the fetus is legally considered a human life. Can your skin develop into a human being or develop heart or organ cells?
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

Well if you say yes then it seems that the laws have a right to infringe upon the body of the mother even if it means that it is against the choice of the mother.According to your opinion, the fetus is a parasite but i challenge you to produce to me evidence pointing to the point that the fetus is a parasite. Those details i mentioned to you have been proved scientifically and if the courts have determined it as being a human life then how can you call it a parasite? So what if an organism takes and does not returns? Does it means that it is always a parasite? Again one of the laws of parasitism that the source has to be an outside source but in this case the fetus is from the body of the mother itsel. You seem to be confusing the terms parasitic with fetal. Because the relationship between a mother and a fetus can be described as being parasitic does it mean it is a parasitic relationship because what you are looking at is the deinition of the term itself and not the deeper contexts or elements involved in this relationship. Abortion is still considered murder but is not being practised in society becuase of the ruling which was made in as much as the death penalty is part of the laws of New York but is not being practised. And if the fetus does not have life or killing a fetus is not considered legal then how come when a mother along with her fetus is killed, The District Attorney will charge the accused with double counts of homicide. One for the mother and one for the fetus. How is this psssible if the fetus is a parasite? And how does the human body not fight against the fetus but rather undergo changes to accept the fetus?Abortion is murder and should not be given as a right to women. You need to be alive inorder to have have rights. Inorder to have life you must be able to be distinguished from the dead. Animals have lives but they are protected by rights. Right?Thank you. You said it yourself. Your skin cells cannot develop into a human or heart so stop comparing it to a fetus.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

Well if you say yes then it seems that the laws have a right to infringe upon the body of the mother even if it means that it is against the choice of the mother.I did not say this at all and I am baffled as to how you came to this conclusion.According to your opinion, the fetus is a parasite but i challenge you to produce to me evidence pointing to the point that the fetus is a parasite. Those details i mentioned to you have been proved scientifically and if the courts have determined it as being a human life then how can you call it a parasite? So what if an organism takes and does not returns? Does it means that it is always a parasite? Again one of the laws of parasitism that the source has to be an outside source but in this case the fetus is from the body of the mother itsel. You seem to be confusing the terms parasitic with fetal. Because the relationship between a mother and a fetus can be described as being parasitic does it mean it is a parasitic relationship because what you are looking at is the deinition of the term itself and not the deeper contexts or elements involved in this relationship. I have given my reasons why the fetus-mother relationship could be defined as parasitic in literally every post since the issue came up. If you are going to blatantly ignore them, I am not going to rephrase them again.Abortion is still considered murder but is not being practised in society becuase of the ruling which was made in as much as the death penalty is part of the laws of New York but is not being practised.Abortion is legal.Murder is not legal.Therefor, legally, abortion cannot be murder.And if the fetus does not have life or killing a fetus is not considered legal then how come when a mother along with her fetus is killed, The District Attorney will charge the accused with double counts of homicide. One for the mother and one for the fetus. I do not agree with this precedent unless the fetus has passed the threshold of viability. Abortion is murder and should not be given as a right to women. You need to be alive inorder to have have rights. Inorder to have life you must be able to be distinguished from the dead. Animals have lives but they are protected by rights. Right?Sorry, abortion is still not murder and yes, it should be a right to women. I am not trying to claim that fetuses are dead, so I am not sure why you brought that up. I realize that they are alive. I just do not put that expression of life on the same level of the expression of life you see in actual conscious human beings. Animals are alive but they are not considered human. That was kind of my point. Being composed of living tissue does not automatically mean you are a human and you get all the rights that come along with that.Thank you. You said it yourself. Your skin cells cannot develop into a human or heart so stop comparing it to a fetus.Don't ignore the part of the sentence that is inconvenient to you. An aborted fetus is equally incapable of developing into a human.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

The Laws have a rigght to infringe upon the body of anyone in order to control criminal activity especially since it was created by the majority of the people of this land.I don't want to hear your reason. I need you to produce evidence pointing that the fetus is indeed a parasite. What is your opinion is your opinion but that does not mean you are correct. Everybody knows what a parasitic realtionship is but there is a deeper relationship here in which several elements of science were combined to provide a deeper scientific relationship. Scientifically, in order for the realtionship to be considered parasitic, therehas to be the elements of parasitism to exists. Those elements are not here. Let me put it this way for you, every adult person has personhood but if the elements of personhood are absent, it means that person does not have personhood at all even though some might consider him or her as having personhood. Again, i dont need to hear your opinions. If you want to prove your point, then produce evidence and i will believe you.So who cares what is legal and what is not legal. Laws change all the time. Wasn't slavery considered legal? Isn't it illegal now? Aobrtion is the intentional taking of a human life and murder is also the intentional taking of a human life. Let me put it this way to you, I am standing holding a gun to a man's head, and i have two choices, one is to kill him and the other is not to kill him. If i kill him i will be doing something that is both morally and legally wrong. If i save him, i will be doing something that is both morally and legally right. You still used the term fetus so the laws still apply to fetus and homicide which means that the fetus is still considered as human life.But one of the laws of science in defining the term of life states that inorder for an individual to be referred to as having life, they have to be able to be distinguished from the dead. Again, not my opinion but the findings of scientists.So is that why you want to kill a fetus? Because you know it will develop into a human being because according to you an aborted fetus cannot develop into a human being. Why would it develop into a human being if you already took the life of it? Furthermore, when a fetus is formed, organ formation begins about three weeks after the fetus itself is formed including a beating heart which pumps blood.NB: When i mentioned the term "you" i am referring to pro choice supporters and not you specifically. Furthermore let me also be clear that i support spontaneous abortion and not induced abortion since spontaneou abortion since spontaneous abortion is beyond the control of the woman.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

It is not what you care about. What you think or care about is different from the view of the laws. Selling sex has to do with whether one has the freedom to choose in regards to their body which is however prevented by the laws.You keep saying that the mother fetus relationship is parasitic but you are still failing to produce proper proof. The first evidence you produced is a blog. Who cares about a blog? Ablog is the exchange of information between people who talks about a subject. In the dictionary the term parasite was defined. Again anyone knows the definition of parasite so prove to me or produce any scientific findings that proved the fetus is a parasite. So far, you have failed to produce any proper evidence to prove that. All you keep doing is defining what the term parasite means and then applying it to the term fetus because of the existing relationship. Source:http://www.l4l.org/library/notparas.html You seem to be forgetting that the fetus not only has a human identity but a separate human identity which identifies the fetus as another human being. The only difference between an actual baby and the fetus is one is outside the womb and the other isnt. So why is it foolish? Organs are a part of the human body but can organs develop into a human being? What do you mean the homicide laws do not apply to fetuses in America? Last time i had a conversation with a Judge he told me that the double counts of homicide still applies to all fetuses. And it is still in practice so where are you living in? In Fantasy America?It seems that you are having a tough time understanding the message i am trying to convey. According to scientists one of the rules for life and not living to exist in a individual, the first rule that should be present is that the individual or entity MUST be able to be distinguished from the dead. If this rule exists, then the entity or individual can be referred to as having life. Abortion again is the taking of a human life. Why do people not want to get pregnant? Because they are unable to accept responsiblity of the unborn for some reason or the other. So it is the process whereby the fetus is killed in a procedure. If a person has the intention to abort the child so engages in an action that will knowingly cause a miscarriage, then that no longer counts as spontaneous abortion but rather induced abortion. For an action to be determined whether it is criminal or not, there has to be intention to commit the action itself.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

One thing we are taught in law is not to accept any fact until proper evidence is produced and you check those sources you produced and tell me what the problem is with them. You never used sources like that in an argument because of the validity of the facts become a question. Abortion is murder but became known as a woman's right to choose after the case Roe vs. Wade tried. Why do you think abortion in society was considered murder? Point out atleast one phrase in those source which talks about the fetus being a parasite and has evidence to show that it is indeed a fetus?So are you trying to say that a person who has lost the functioning brain has lost their identity as well? Our brian does not gives us identity. DNA gives us human identity and the human heart gives us life within our body or maintains it.Why does it have nothing to do with their potential when the six month old baby was a fetus? Dont that demonstrate the potential aspects of a fetus? Abortion is the killing of the fetus because it has a beating heart and according to you it is alive. If something is alive and you are in the process of destroying its existence completely, isnt that the process of killing it?Again, i am in Criminal Law and i was taught that fetuses are protected by homicide laws. So it isnt about what you agree with or not, it is about what the laws are. Why do you think when the a accused is accused of murdering a woman and if she is pregnant, the District Attorney will institute a charge of double homicides against the accused? The homicide laws comes into effect when the life of the mother is taken or when the life of the fetus istaken without the consent of the mother. Let me ask you this, if a licensed doctor performs an abortion on a woman without her permission or consent and knowledge, what do you think the DA will do? The DA will institute a chage of homicide? But according to doctors and scientists you refer to something as having life (and i quote life not alive) when they can be able to distinguish it from the dead. What part of this statement are you having a tough time with? Did i ever say that you referred to the fetus as being dead? English is my first language. We are having a problem in this debating because you are basically just giving your opinion without lack of evidence. I understand that you do not contest this fact so then why are you arguing about life then? This is not what i state but what scientists and doctors states. That is why i mentioned it for the third time because i believe you have a tough time understanding the true aspect of the statement i made. I dont want to hear because something is alive does not mean it has life. I need evidence to back that up. Every miscarriage could be investigated if the laws permitted it to investigate it. The fetus is protected by human rights to certain extents.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

Frankly, anyone has the right to abortion because of free will and liberty, and nobody has the right to tell anyone what to do with their body.HOWEVER,The only problem I have is the definition of fetus and human.If it is isn't murder, then why is that when a person murders a pregnant woman, whom is carrying a fetus, is charged with double homicide? How can that be? Where is the justice? Shouldn't it be only homicide? The person did in fact murder only one person because the fetus is not human
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

Quite the contrary. Most people who murder a pregnant women will get charged only once homicide, the exception being if the woman was pregnant for around 8 months or more.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

You said the fetus is not human then what is it? Again read up on Webster v. RpFor your information why don't you read up on an important case, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services which upheld that life begins at conception and this view was also supported by doctors. Isn't the fetus referred to as a developing human being?The whole concept is that the fetus posses life and if the fetus comes from the family of homosapiens which in other words is referred to as human beings then don't that make it a human being also or a plant?
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

If it is isn't murder, then why is that when a person murders a pregnant woman, whom is carrying a fetus, is charged with double homicide? How can that be? Where is the justice? Shouldn't it be only homicide? The person did in fact murder only one person because the fetus is not humanIt's probably because a pregnant woman is seen as being more vulnerable, and motherly, so killing such a person is especially heinous.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

It's probably because a pregnant woman is seen as being more vulnerable, and motherly, so killing such a person is especially heinous.The vulnerability of a woman is completely irrelevant. So, vulnerability is your justification for double homicide of a pregnant woman with a fetus, yet a woman getting a abortion is not because the fetus is not human.I am vulnerable of getting hit by a car walking the street, so should the driver of the car be charged with murder or manslaughter?
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

You are right. That's the same thing i believe in too. thank you.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

The vulnerability of a woman is completely irrelevant. So, vulnerability is your justification for double homicide of a pregnant woman with a fetus, yet a woman getting a abortion is not because the fetus is not human.I am vulnerable of getting hit by a car walking the street, so should the driver of the car be charged with murder or manslaughter?You asked why and I told you some of the potential reasoning behind it. I don't agree with it either.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

For your information why don't you read up on an important case, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services which upheld that life begins at conception and this view was also supported by doctors. Isn't the fetus referred to as a developing human being?The whole concept is that the fetus posses life and if the fetus comes from the family of homosapiens which in other words is referred to as human beings then don't that make it a human being also or a plant?
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

For your information why don't you read up on an important case, Webster v. Reproductive Health Services which upheld that life begins at conception and this view was also supported by doctors. Isn't the fetus referred to as a developing human being?I'm more interested in science, I.E. knowledge of nature, than legal rulings which are a matter of politics.If you don't have a functioning body that can exist on its own, it follows that you lack developed organs, and even more importantly a developed brain. This means you lack awareness of your own life.It would be nice if you researched the developmental stages of fertilisation through foetal development, and birth. Then you might appreciate the fact that while a fertilised egg is alive, it isn't a life, or at least not worthy of being granted the rights of a born human life.The whole issue that you are so passionate about is actually over the killing of fertilised eggs and tiny, unaware foetuses.The whole concept is that the fetus posses life and if the fetus comes from the family of homosapiens which in other words is referred to as human beings then don't that make it a human being also or a plant?If you're going to grant something the rights of a human simply because it is Homo sapiens sapiens, then this would extend to tissue cultures and blood as well.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

Then why are you even debating a topic that you fail to research on? Legal rulings has nothing to do with politics. If that was the case then why is political science different from law. Laws are formed out of the decisions made by politicians i agree but at the same time amendments to the laws are also made by the supreme court as well. Whether you are dealing with science or business etc at some point you will have to abide by the instructions of the laws.And again debating my friend is based on facts and research not just what you think.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

Then why are you even debating a topic that you fail to research on?I did research it.Legal rulings has nothing to do with politics. If that was the case then why is political science different from law.Law IS a form of politics. It's about appeasing many different voices on an issue by creating legislation that they can all agree on.Laws are formed out of the decisions made by politicians i agree but at the same time amendments to the laws are also made by the supreme court as well. Whether you are dealing with science or business etc at some point you will have to abide by the instructions of the laws.Which at some point are influenced by those with a voice in the matter.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

If you did i will not question because i do not judge but it is as you say. That is referred to as political affairs and not laws. Laws are the rules that are to be followed upon in society, designed to control crime and to allow fair dealings in terms of crimes and business.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

And also if you define the term law then you would see that the definition of law is different from the definition of politics.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

Didn't you develop from tissues and cells so what are you referring to? Furthermore if you hurt a person or wound them, does that not involve a damage of the cells, tissues and or organs as well? Isn't that is why they are charged with assault or attempted murder?
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro choice

Didn't you develop from tissues and cells so what are you referring to? Furthermore if you hurt a person or wound them, does that not involve a damage of the cells, tissues and or organs as well? Isn't that is why they are charged with assault or attempted murder?You missed the point entirely. Assault isn't a crime because we care about dead cells, it is a crime because we have decided that it is bad behaviour. Same with attempted murder.
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

And we have decided it is a crime because it results in causing injury to the person. Would we make it a law if it didn't cause damage to the body of the person?
Debate: Should abortion be made illegal?
Side: pro life

So great .. if a fetus isn't a person, if someone is deemed not responsible enough to raise a child (say a woman convict who wants the child) then it should be fine to force the abortion on her right? It should be like not allowing her to have a car. "Oh don't worry, it wasn't a real life anyhow, off you go."