Instigator / Pro

Mall

1382

rating

441

debates

45.69%

won

Topic

#6271

Abortion and homosexuality are two sides of the same coin.

Status

Voting

The participant that receives the most points from the voters is declared a winner.

Voting will end in:

Tags

Science

truth

LGBT

PLANNED PARENTHOOD

Parameters

Publication date: 06.07.2025 09:10PM
Last updated date: 06.27.2025 04:20PM
Type: Standard
Number of rounds: 4
Time for argument: One week
Max argument characters: 30,000
Voting period: One month
Point system: Winner selection
Voting system: Open

Contender / Con

LucyStarfire

1500

rating

debates

41.67%

won

Description

Disclaimer : Regardless of the setup for voting win or lose, The aim of this interaction, Is for those that view it, Learn and or take away anything that will amount to any constructive value ultimately. So that counts as anything that'll cause one to reconsider an idea, Understand a subject better, Help build a greater wealth of knowledge getting closer to truth. When either of us has accomplished that with any individual here, That's who the victor of the debate becomes.

Questions on the topic, send a message.

Round 1

Mall

06.12.2025 10:49AM

Pro

I thought this would attract so and so.

The opposing side says that the opposing side supports homosexuality but not abortion.

The truth is according to the topic forum, is that the abortion is supported by the opposing side.

All stages of pregnancy are all stages of pregnancy and the first stage is prior to a baby developing and being developed.

So to get it on record, the question to the opposing side, do you support abortion prior to the development of a complete human being inside the woman, the womb of man?

Audience, if the opposing side does not answer these questions honestly and direct, it will be a forfeit on the topic.

The termination of a pregnancy which is the end of an unborn life which comes down to cellular level, cell, germ, strand of DNA, particle, atom, etc.

All these elements including sexual reproductive elements are not a concern for true "pro choice/pro abortion" folks.

So it would make sense to use the same basis for homosexuality.

The act of homosexuality disregards sexual reproductive sexuality.

So it be inconsistent to support one and not the other. Someone that is against aborting or killing a developed baby is not because that one is opposed to terminating life but because what is being terminated resembles so much of an alike species, there is perhaps emotional appeal, empathetic appeal.

But this is a tug at the conscience as opposed to integrity of keeping life period. It's like a person that can't stand to see animals butchered for meat but is a meat eater. The person will not be vegan for the sake of integral principle of keeping animal life.

Likewise with people that are pregnant by an incomplete conception period and take a pill or some sort of procedure to end life growing, the life is still being stripped away of what could of been further which was to be a baby.

So it's the mere image viscerally by empathic relationship that a pro abortion person cannot stomach. That is , no pun intended, the aborting of an unborn baby but would accept aborting unborn life. Which has inconsistency of its own.

If you are that person that supports homosexual use of sexual organs to abort their function in use, but is for abortion prior to the development of a baby, you are demonstrating the two sides of the same coin.

Which proves the topic statement. If you are for abortion up until some point and support homosexuality, it solidifies the topic statement and negates your stance at once.

Why the negation?

This is by being for taking away the life of that baby in advance instead of post development.

You shoot a gun , fire a shot off, throw a blunt object up in the air , you don't see where it strikes. Therefore it won't have the same effect on you if you were to see whom it strikes.

However the integrity of doing such things is still the same devasting destructive harmful deleterious reality which solidifies and argues to the persuasion of one's consistency.

So I end here with the question to the opposing side. Forfeiting to answer is forfeiting the debate.

Do you support abortion prior to the development of a complete human being inside the woman, the womb of man?

LucyStarfire

06.12.2025 11:56AM

Con

No, I dont support abortion, but homosexuality is okay.

Round 2

Mall

06.12.2025 03:11PM

Pro

They're unable to ban you completely.

LucyStarfire

06.13.2025 05:11PM

Con

Their weakness then.

Round 3

Mall

06.14.2025 12:15PM

Pro

Why did the great sun god get banned?

What did you do then?

LucyStarfire

06.14.2025 12:19PM

Con

Why did the great sun god get banned?

Adaptable became moderator and I was so upset that I asked some other moderator to ban me.

Round 4

Mall

06.14.2025 12:23PM

Pro

Such a circus on this site.

Interesting interacting with you again.

LucyStarfire

06.14.2025 12:24PM

Con

Thank you for this talk.

Umbrellacorp

06.27.2025 04:20PM

-->

@LucyStarfire

Are you kidding? I literally see no argument from you in this one. If you are talking about the other debate in which i voted for your opponent then yes, i totally understand what argument you wanted to make there. You just made it look like a kid that starts to explain a law of physics that he saw on youtube and only gets the name right and not the explanation. I highly doubt you actually understood what you wanted to say, considering how incoherent your arguments are... .

LucyStarfire

06.27.2025 04:01PM

-->

@Umbrellacorp

You dont seem to understand my arguments.

Mall

06.26.2025 08:15PM

Does anybody believe in supporting homosexuality but not abortion and vice versa?

fauxlaw

06.26.2025 01:56AM

To participants, readers and voters: please read my eighth line which currently says: "...by arguing that abortion and homosexuality are not linked by any common thread..." by deleting "not." That is not wha was meant. Therefore, read as "by arguing that abortion and homosexuality are linked by any common thread..." Thanks.

whiteflame

06.26.2025 01:38AM

-->

@Mall

@pierree

@LucyStarfire

**************************************************
>Reported Vote: pierree // Mod action: Removed
>Voting Policy: info.debateart.com/terms-of-service/voting-policy
>Points Awarded: 1 to Pro
>Reason for Decision:
LucyStarfire get the fuck out of this site please

>Reason for Mod Action:
Pretty obvious...
**************************************************

Umbrellacorp

06.27.2025 03:56PM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Winner

1 point(s)

Reason:

Lucystarfire as always doesn't even try to make an argument. But pro just proposes an incredibly absurd topic that it isn't even possible to defend by argument. Anyways, another missed win from lucystarfire.

fauxlaw

06.26.2025 01:19AM

Criterion

Pro

Tie

Con

Points

Winner

1 point(s)

Reason:

Pro’s R1 asks a question that belongs in the Description because it asks for a different BoP than stipulated by the Resolve: “Abortion and homosexuality are two sides of the same coin.” By the Resolve, Con’s BoP is that Abortion and Homosexuality are not two sides of the same coin, but demands “do you support abortion prior to the development of a complete human being inside the woman, the womb of man?” which is not directed to the Resolve as a blanket acceptance of Abortion, but parsing it by time. And there is no mention of homosexuality in the question, but demands a forfeit should the question be ignored., which amounted to a quasi-early round blitzkrieg. That's not necessarily a detraction from Pro, but not an above-board argument: “The act of homosexuality disregards sexual reproductive sexuality.” This is patently false because at least one of the sexual partners can be a fertile female who declares being homosexual, but can have relations with the opposing sex, and become pregnant by those relations, regardless of whether the other partner in her sexual life is male or female. Therefore, the statement fails.
Con replied to the Pro R1 Question in R1, “No, I don't support abortion, but homosexuality is okay,” which de-links the “two sides of the coin” resolution, thus defeating the Resolve unless Pro can rebut in a succeeding round by arguing that abortion and homosexuality are not linked by any common thread, let alone by the rigidity of coinage.
Pro’s R2 appears as an extension, but is completely unresponsive to the Resolve, discussing Con’s potential ban. What has that to do with th4e debate?
Con’s R2 response amounts to an extension of argument, but recognized that the Resolve is incorrect, and therefore a relevant rebuttal more than merely an extension because of Con's de-linking rebuttal.
Pro’s R3 & R4 are, like R2, unrelated to the Resolve, and any argument supporting it.
Con, having successfully turned the Resolve to his favor, wins.