Try the political quiz
@BB7DS8W DisagreementsCounter Arguments4mos ago

First, I would say that if you want to make an argument, you should know how to write a sentence

Secondly, I think it is always the person carrying the baby's decision whether they want to keep the baby or not. I don't think it should concern anyone else. Why do people care so much about what a woman does with her own body? It's cruel that women have to die because aborting their baby would be considered murder. Why is a fetus more important than a living person's life? Abortion isn't murder. It's a way out for women who have been raped, who are at risk of death, and simply can't take care of or can't birth a child. My opinions on abortion are very strong because I hate seeing people being told what to do with their own bodies. This isn't a trial; there is no " innocent until proven guilty", it's a woman's life being compared to a nonliving fetus or an unborn child. Children are forced to give birth when they are raped and are put at risk of dying while giving birth because aborting the baby would be considered "murder"?
I just find it disgusting and embarrassing that humans can genuinely think that way. Women should have a choice of what they want to do to their bodies. Nobody else gets a say in what you do. Grown men telling women what to do with their bodies is disgusting. A woman was dying and was denied what she needed to survive because it would mean aborting her baby. Adriana Smith was declared brain-dead and was left on life support for three months just so she could give birth to her baby. Even when a woman has died, she is still forced to carry her baby. Is that really the fate someone should have to live? This shouldn't even be a debate; this should just be a simple right that a woman should have. If you think otherwise, then you should think again.

+
Expand

Knowledge quiz

How much do you know about Counter Argument?

See if you know more than the average American.

Test your knowledge!

No replies yet…

Be the first to reply to this disagreement.

About this author

Learn more about the author that submitted this disagreement.

@BB7DS8W

Last activeActivity1 discussionsInfluence1 engagementsEngagement bias78%Audience bias0%Active in
Counter Arguments  1 Disagreements  1
PartyUndeclaredLocationUnknown

More conversations

Join in on more popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies