azza1625/createdebate-arguments huggingface dataset:
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

but if what you say is true, then why do we have any laws like don't rape, steal, assault, murder?Seriously? You honestly think it was religion that came up with outlawing rape, theft, assault, and murder? Wow...These were outlawed because they violated people's rights. These can be perfectly explained from a secular perspective. It is obvious that religion has poisoned your mind. I bet you're of the mindset that religion is responsible for morality too, right?So if someone you know was murdered, then why should you be upset since their act was right for themMurdering someone else is a violation of their rights. The accusation that its all because of religion that murder is illegal, is just a public declaration to all that you haven't researched your shit and that you've been well indoctrinated into your religious teachings. Don't tell me murder is wrong then turn around and tell me abortion is right. Contradiction.Murder is wrong. Abortion is neutral. It is up to the person to decide. Not you Jawkins. This is not a dictatorship. A fetus is not a person since it lacks all qualities of person hood.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Wait, so abortion doesn't infring on peoples rights? You are taking away the babies right to live. I don't care if it's just a fetus, it is going to be a human being.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Wait, so abortion doesn't infring on peoples rights?To some it does, to others it doesn't.I personally do not believe a fetus is a "human life" until the presence of brain waves, so I do not believe that abortion before that point is a deprivation of rights, as I do not believe it is a baby.I don't care if it's just a fetus, it is going to be a human being.It may be a human, it might not. Seeing as how half of all pregnancies end in miscarriage, declaring that it "is going to be a human being" is statistically questionable.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

I actually am Pro-Life and I am not religious. I do not think abortion should be banned based on religious views because we, as Americans, are a melting pot of cultures and religions and we have no right to guide millions of people buy 1 religious veiw.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

You need to understand that morality does not derive from religion, it derives from nature and its laws! Religion just practices morality!
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

POPPYCOCK !!! While I am personally pro-freedom and pro-choice I strongly disagree. One could argue that regardless of religion there is a soul and it begins at conception. I don't agree, but it is a valid argument.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

I do not live by mythology. Science, the study of God's creation, proves that life begins at conception. Science, God's creation, concurs with God's creation of the human life.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

No they are not... They are based on the judgment of right or wrong which derives from morality which derives from nature's laws. Religion just practices morality it didn't invent it!
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Hey what if I’m an atheist and I still believed that abortion was wrong, again is their a reason why people are forgetting that abortion is unethical. Regardless of what rights women should or shouldn’t have it should be known that it is wrong to kill off an unborn baby and women can look for other options.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Abortion should be legal up to a certain point and then illegal after the matter.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Abortion stops a beating heart, a heart that starts beating after only 15 days of life!
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

A heart does not determine human life. Consciousness does. If you want to get fancy, 'soul' does.And a fetus does not develop brainwaves, thus proving it's consciousness, until after four weeks.Before it has brainwaves, it's reasonable to assume that it does not have a soul and is therefore not yet truly human.Thus, abortion is not murder before, more or less, 4 weeks, and it is murder afterwards.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

I think it may be much later than 4 weeks http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=when-does-consciousness-arise
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

The end of the first section of that article actually said that it was like the baby had a form of consciousness.Furthermore I refer to a more general description of consciousness, as in the very fact that their brain is alive and emitting waves and exhibiting obvious activity.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

If a heart beat does not determine someone is alive, and consciousness does. Please explain people being in comas, they are no longer conscious but their heart still beats, thus keeping them alive. So is that person dead because they don't have consciousness? Might as well kill them, since in your opinion they're already dead.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

People who are in commas have a consciousness. They are asleep for an indefinite period of time, not brain-dead. Don't be silly.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Actually a coma is where the individual is in a prolonged unconcious state and does not respond to stimuli and may have lowered brain activity(but not zero activity). So yes they're not brain dead, however they're not conscious. Let me ask you this if a heart beat doesn't prove someone is alive, then are you saying someone can be conscious without a heartbeat? See you need a heartbeat to have consciousness, therefor you need a heart to signify you're alive. LIFE.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Possessing a consciousness and being conscious are not the same thing.No, someone cannot posses a consciousness without having a heart beat. But someone can possess a heartbeat without having a consciousness. Therefore a heartbeat is not automatically indicative to a consciousness, and therefore, a heartbeat is not automatically indicative to a soul.Just because you need one to possess the other does not mean that you do indeed possess both. Therefore, just because you possess a heartbeat, does not automatically mean you are alive, because you are not a human being unless you possess a consciousness.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

So because someone does not possess consciousness for a time period makes them not a a human being, even though their heart is beating and they have human DNA. I guess once they loose consciousness you can say they're a dog, cat, mouse, ect. If consciousness proves them being a human being, what do you say to the people that have brain dead relatives, that they're no longer human beings? That in all respect sir, sounds ludicrous.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

So because someone does not possess consciousness for a time period makes them not a a human being, even though their heart is beating and they have human DNA.What makes someone human? You can say their DNA or a beating heart, but while both of these are prerequisites for a human being to exist, they don't really make a human, human. What makes a human a human is their mind; their personality, their reasoning, their desires, their opinions, etc.Without that, do you still have a human? I don't think so. If yes, on what grounds? If they have no brain, they have no personality. They are meat, with eyes (or in the case of a fetus, just a tiny mass of meat period). And to that end, I wouldn't consider them human if they had no brain.If consciousness proves them being a human being, what do you say to the people that have brain dead relatives, that they're no longer human beings? That in all respect sir, sounds ludicrous.A brain dead person is brain dead. As in, they are dead. Are they a human?Well, would you call a corpse a human? Or would you call it a human corpse?The only reason people cling onto the idea that the brain dead are not dead is because they have an emotional attachment to the deceased, but the idea that their body is alive, even though the person is dead, makes the loved ones feel like maybe the loved one is alive, even though, the loved one died with their brain.It's not ludicrous. I don't call a human corpse 'human'. I don't call a potato a 'human'. Neither possess essential things that would define them as 'human'. So why would I call a brain dead person, a human?You said it's ludicrous to not call them human. I say it's more ludicrous to call them human then it is to allow a dog to vote.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Let me ask you this if a heart beat doesn't prove someone is alive, then are you saying someone can be conscious without a heartbeat? See you need a heartbeat to have consciousness, therefor you need a heart to signify you're alive. LIFE.No, people cannot be alive (for very long) without a heart beat. A heart beat is require for life, but it is not the defining characteristic of life. I don't understand how you failed to realize this in your logic/reasoning. If you had a heart beat, but you were brain dead, then your body would be alive but you would not be alive. Everything that you are, it's all just your brain.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

The idea of “brain waves” is ambiguous. Even a single neuron has electrical impulse “brain waves” but they are too small to register on a EEG or MEG. (see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electroencephalography  which discusses this exact point). It’s a function of the threshold attainable in our measuring, not the 'humanness' of the infant. So let's say it another way. Life begins at conception. Well what kind of life is it? Is it a fish, or dog? No. It's a new human being. At conception, the zygote has 23 pairs of chromosomes and approximately 50,000 genes from each parent, which combine to determine all of one's physical characteristics, including sex, facial features, body type, and color of hair, eyes, and skin. It has the potential to be a fully functional, independent person only needing time and nourishment to attain that.Now you may be able to impose some artificial definition of 'human' to escape that reality or make your conscience feel better when it begins taking on the role of God. I choose to let Him be the judge as to when a 'soul' is created and if I err, it will be on the side of life.And, as far as your illustration is concerned about Consciousness/brain waves determining human life. Let's imagine your child was in an accident and sustained a head injury and lost all 'brain waves'. You were about to have them 'pull the plug'. Just before that happens, the doctor rushes in and tells you that a major medical breakthru has just been achieved and a new machine will be able to restore your child's "brain wave/consciousness" and will arrive at the hospital in a couple of weeks.Are you going to use your criteria and figure the child is not 'human' or are you going to wait for the machine?
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

At conception, the zygote has 23 pairs of chromosomes and approximately 50,000 genes from each parentI would like to point out that a human does NOT have 100 thousand genes total. The number is ~20 thousand.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

That's all you've got in response to my posting? Mark, you're slipping.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

No, I could tear your argument apart. I've already encountered a variant of your argument in the past on another abortion debate on this site, albeit one a little bit better constructed. I honestly do not have the desire to write up a long response to your post though.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

We'll let the readers decide who makes the better argument. It's obvious to me you don't have a leg on which to stand.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Fine. I'll write a response, just for you.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

So let's say it another way. Life begins at conception. Well what kind of life is it? Is it a fish, or dog? No. It's a new human being. At conception, the zygote has 23 pairs of chromosomes and approximately 50,000 genes from each parent, which combine to determine all of one's physical characteristics, including sex, facial features, body type, and color of hair, eyes, and skin. It has the potential to be a fully functional, independent person only needing time and nourishment to attain that.Let's not. There are many people who would like to have sex, without having a child. Condoms and birth control are not perfect, they can fail. The kind of life in the womb of a female after conception is a fetus with human DNA. It is not yet a person, it does not achieve that until usually around week 23-24 when the brain finishes a key stage of development, connecting the cortex to the thamalus. Humans have ~20 thousand genes, not 50 thousand from each parent for a total of 100 thousand. Potential to become a human does not equate to being a human. If Jill is 15 and says she wants to have 2 kids when she gets older, and someone kills her, do we charge the murderer with 3 murders? I mean, the murderer did kill those two egg cells in her ovaries. And those 2 egg cells were definitely going to become people one day. According to your potential human argument, the murderer needs to be charged with 3 murders. Can you see the absurdity here? This same argument can apply to male sperm as well. A male claims to want X amount of kids, dies sometimes later. Murderer charged with X amount of murders. Now you may be able to impose some artificial definition of 'human' to escape that reality or make your conscience feel better when it begins taking on the role of God. I choose to let Him be the judge as to when a 'soul' is created and if I err, it will be on the side of life.Artificial definition? They're all artificial! There is no "His" definition, someone made "His" definition up based on what they believed. One rests on what feels right, the other is based on science and rational thought.  Let's imagine your child was in an accident and sustained a head injury and lost all 'brain waves'. You were about to have them 'pull the plug'. Just before that happens, the doctor rushes in and tells you that a major medical breakthru has just been achieved and a new machine will be able to restore your child's "brain wave/consciousness" and will arrive at the hospital in a couple of weeks.Wtf is this? Incoherent babble? If you lose all brain waves, you're brain dead. Brain dead is synonymous with death. Are you going to use your criteria and figure the child is not 'human' or are you going to wait for the machine?The child would be dead, therefore not a person. It is still a human, but it's a dead human. It is certainly not a person. Happy that I responded to your argument now?
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Why is it that your trying to justify abortion which by the way was the largest cause of death worldwide in 2019, ending the lives of an estimated 73.3 million unborn babies. How can people keep justifying abortion just because a baby doesn’t have a conscious or a soul yet when it won’t even live long enough to see the world. It’s obnoxious…
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Abortion should NEVER be legal, chatturgha! It is always murder, and it is God who gives and God who takes away!
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

If it's God who gives and God who takes, who are you to define what is murder? What if his will to take away the life of the fetus through a doctor's hands?If you're going to argue dogma, at least do not be a hypocrite.Now, other then bringing your theology into this for no good reason, please actually give a good, debated reason that a fetus is a human being even before it develops brain waves and is being murdered during an abortion.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_popout&v=fKyljukBE70#!A You talk such stuff and nonsense! It's futile to argue with a fool!
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

So, you cannot understand what I'm saying, and that means it's nonsense?GinKirk, I don't think you're cut out for debating if you can't understand your opponent. I had a totally legitimate response that any person fit for debate would understand, but you are unable to. I did not talk in circles or have bad English. You just couldn't understand it.How unfortunate.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

How unfortunate you have said in your heart there is no God. http://www.answersingenesis.org/media/image/cartoons/after-eden/mission-contradiction
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Not everyone shares your beliefs. Therefore, you will never be able to properly debate upon the majority of topics until you learn how to argue without resorting to your beliefs. Many debates have nothing to do with dogma and everything to do with logic. Bringing your dogma into the debate contradicts your ability to create logic upon the subject, and the very essence of a successful debate is to make a logical, reasonable, believable, irrefutable position... which is something that belief, by itself, cannot do.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

It's futile to argue with a fool!It sure is.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

God defines murder. Gha! For a fetus to be killed by a doctor does not follow God being the one who gives and the one who takes away! Gha!My belief in Jesus necessarily drives everything I do. I cannot compartmentalize my life.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

God defines murder. Gha! For a fetus to be killed by a doctor does not follow God being the one who gives and the one who takes away! Gha!If we are all governed under God, though, then he gives and takes through us just as he gives and takes through other aspects of nature.And you seem to believe this, as evidenced by: My belief in Jesus necessarily drives everything I do. I cannot compartmentalize my life.So then Jesus, one of the avatar's of God (Father, Son, Holy Spirit), drives all your actions? Then perhaps he also drives the actions of murders (the Crusades), including abortion doctors.If this is so, how can you claim that it's against God's will to abort? If he didn't mean for it to happen, then why did the abortion doctor even do it?
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Um, hello, the atrocities committed during the Crusades were not committed by true believers in Jesus. How is that so difficult for folks to comprehend? If you need a history lesson on this, I will be glad to oblige. It is better for an evil abortionist to die than it is for him to kill thousands of innocent babies, just like it would have been better for Hitler to die than for him to keep killing Jews, Christians and others. Wow, I'm shaking my head in disbelief over your lack of logic.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Um, hello, the atrocities committed during the Crusades were not committed by true believers in Jesus. How is that so difficult for folks to comprehend?Well, considering it was Pope Urban the Second that ordered these Crusades, I find your argument lacking evidence.I mean... come on. It was the Pope. To say the Crusades were not caused by Christians is to pick and choose the definition of 'Christian'.The problem with that though is that it's a contrived argument. A Christian is: "A person who adheres to Christianity, an Abrahamic, monotheistic religion based on the life and teachings of Jesus of Nazareth as recorded in the Canonical gospels and the letters of the New Testament."Are you going to try and dispute the idea that Pope Urban the Second was not the above definition? Because if so, you're going to loose.It is better for an evil abortionist to die than it is for him to kill thousands of innocent babies...So you believe that soulless masses of flesh are worth more then human lives?I'm calling it: Saturday, November 24, 2012, at 7:50 PM - I have just met a psychopath.... just like it would have been better for Hitler to die than for him to keep killing Jews, Christians and others.Hitler killed living, breathing, conscious people.Abortion doctors rarely kill people conscious people. And they shouldn't, but it is by no means anywhere near the brutality that a genocidal mass murderer committed. Abortion doctors prevent people from ever living. They do away with potential humans. But as a human corpse is not human, and a potato is not human, a potential human is just that: not human. They do not have humanity unless they have a consciousness, because the presence of a consciousness is the only measurable proof of a soul.You are a psychopath if you cannot understand this. To compare Hitler, LITERALLY, to an abortion doctor is a demonstration of a lack of connection your mind has to reality, and thus, you belong in a looney bin.Wow, I'm shaking my head in disbelief over your lack of logic.The whole world is crazy, not you, huh? Yeah... no.To believe that a doctor should be killed for not even murdering human beings, makes you a sociopath.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Um, hello, the atrocities committed during the Crusades were not committed by true believers in Jesus.They used religion as their reason, and I don't think they just made it up for an excuse, given that the only thing that can motivate murder on the scale observed is religion.It is better for an evil abortionist to die than it is for him to kill thousands of innocent babies, just like it would have been better for Hitler to die than for him to keep killing Jews, Christians and others. Wow, I'm shaking my head in disbelief over your lack of logic.Abortionists don't kill babies, they stop the development of bundles of cells. 1 week after conception, it's just a bundle of cells that does not resemble a human, or even a recognisable zygote. An abortion carried out is thus not killing a baby. Here, you advocate murder, to prevent the removal of bundles of cells. You call abortion murder, but you sanction murder to prevent murder... hard to see the moral high-ground there, even if abortion was murder, which it's not.Don't insult your fellow debaters. It makes you look childish and like you're struggling to put in something productive to the argument. I'd really like this trend of petty insults to cease, as would everyone on here - it does not help.
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Okay but we all agree that it’s wrong right? Or are are you about to tell me that it’s insignificant to abort a baby because it’s not living?
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: for abortion

Is it right or wrong? For whom? And how am I suppose to judge that?!
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Is murder wrong? If you say yes, then how are you supposed to judge that?! If you say no, then you need to be put behind bars due to being a threat to human life. With your philosophy how can you judge anything to be right or wrong?!
Debate: Abortion is it right or wrong?
Side: against abortion

Let me re-word it by saying, if you say something is right or wrong, with your philosophy how do you know it to be right or wrong? Since you are saying you don't have to understanding to be a just judge.