debate

@Ren So if a mother carried through the pregnancy and when the child is 1 month old she found that she couldnt support it, do you think she should kill the baby? In these cases, she should set it up for adoption

@Mio I think that the pregnancy fase is when the mother has to think if she is capable of raising a child. It's a lot of time to think about that. If she eventually give birth to the child, then she should just take care of the kid. If she is not capable of doing so, set it up for adoption. After all, she had a lot of time to think about the matter.

@mio thats not the same thing a fetus and a baby are very very very different fetuses are not sentient and do not feel pain they do not know they are alive and simply exist they are akin to plants where as a baby can absolutely feel pain and distress

im gonna go to sleep soon so type your rebuttals and i get to them tomarrow oyasumi fellow debaters~

"this has to do with the government telling you what you can and cant do with your body if you got the snip then no unwanted kids would be made which means no more abortions" Again, I don't see how this is even an argument. Preventing unwanted pregnancies is vastly different from allowing someone to kill a person. Bodily rights are important, but not as important as your right to life. "ill bring up again that i believe that because sex is used more for recreation than for procreation that there should be reasonable doubt given that you will have a child" But in the hypothetical I gave, there's a 1% chance of causing someone to lose their kidneys. You still consenting to the possibility of pregnancy, so if that happens you should be responsible to do anything possible to ensure they don't die. "so your fine with the government mandating that we grow extra organs in our bodies to give to organ donations? it would save a lot of lives" In terms of law, right to life means that nobody, including the government, can try to end your life. This is different from dying from natural causes. "im also curious as to why you think the fetus has more moral consideration than the adult?" I don't. I give them both moral consideration.

"fetuses are not sentient and do not feel pain they do not know they are alive and simply exist" I asked this before, but I'll ask again: Why does sentience matter? What about sentience makes you worthy of moral consideration?

@Ren but what about if something happens after birth? For example, what happens if she lost her job and can't find a new one. She finds that she cannot afford to raise the child. Now is it okay if she kills the 1 month old baby?

@Mio No, not really. If she loses her job, and see that she isn't capable of raising the child anymore, it will be sad, but she will have to set the baby for adoption. I mean, she wanted to have the child, but since she can't anymore, someone will have to take care of it in her place.

@Mio I mean, yes you could. But with adoption, you can't really know if that family will treat the child well. I knew a person some time ago who was adopted, but he was treated terribly. So giving a child to adoption is something of a risk really. So what I think is: If you can't afford a baby, abort it. If you can afford it or you want the baby, have the baby. If for some reason, you lost your job or some other serious thing happened, give the baby to adoption.