Instigator / Pro
4
1481
rating
11
debates
40.91%
won
Topic
#866

Fetuses as a replacement for the USD

Status
Finished

The debate is finished. The distribution of the voting points and the winner are presented below.

Winner & statistics
Better arguments
0
3
Better sources
2
2
Better legibility
1
1
Better conduct
1
1

After 1 vote and with 3 points ahead, the winner is...

Barney
Tags
Parameters
Publication date
Last updated date
Type
Standard
Number of rounds
4
Time for argument
Two days
Max argument characters
12,000
Voting period
One week
Point system
Multiple criterions
Voting system
Open
Contender / Con
7
1810
rating
49
debates
100.0%
won
Description

Specifically, fetuses aborted prior to 5 months. These fetuses currently have no value, as evidenced by the debate: https://www.debateart.com/debates/654

I propose we change that.

-->
@bmdrocks21

Thanks. However, I suspect he was closer to being on the Reich track than the right one. 😂

-->
@Barney

I just got an E-mail and was curious as to what this was about. Does this mean we won the contest? I've always wanted an award, I'll have to go tell my mom she'd be so proud of you!

-->
@Barney

Congratulations! I still think Pro was on the right track, though ;)

-->
@Tiwaz

Congratulations, our debate is officially part of the first annual Hall of Fame.
https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/2908/congratulations-to-the-hof-inductees

-->
@Tiwaz

Alright cool I was just making sure

-->
@Pinkfreud08

Yes, and that was the moral framing I used to organize this debate.

-->
@Tiwaz

yes, and it'd ultimately be up to the owner or parent of the fetus to decide.

This is why random people shouldn't be able to decide the fate of random undeveloped fetus's

-->
@Pinkfreud08

So what you're saying is that inanimate or lifeless objects can carry implicit moral value regardless of sentience.

Not that it matters, considering this debate was isolated to the practicality of the proposal and not the moral one intentionally for this reason.

Just because undeveloped fetus's don't have moral consideration doesn't mean they should be used as USD due to practical reasons.

For example, rocks aren't sentient so a rock doesn't deserve moral consideration. However, rocks would be very heavy and inconvenient to lug around especially compared to paper bills.

Another example would be a house. A house isn't sentient so a house doesn't deserve moral consideration. However, if you destroy someone's house then their well being is affected.

-->
@Ramshutu

Thanks for re-voting!

-->
@Barney

Sure if I have time. Let me finish up some dinner and I'll hopefully cast a vote.

-->
@David

It sounds like you've already ended up having to give the arguments at least a good skimming. If you're not too busy, would you mind casting a vote?

Tiwaz is a really good debater

-->
@Barney

I never said I was pro-life. I'm quite pro abortion for anyone who isn't white.

-->
@Barney
@Ramshutu

This was borderline-ish as to whether or not this was a troll debate. I asked bsh his opinion and he ruled that it was not a troll debate due to the serious nature of the arguments.

-->
@Ramshutu

I made the same bet when I accepted this debate.

Oh well, at least it taught me something about the mental state of certain (not all) pro-lifers.

-->
@Barney

I intend to. Strangely, I had strongly suspected a debate upon whether to use actual aborted human fetuses as a mechanism of currency was a troll debate.

-->
@Ramshutu
@Wrick-It-Ralph
@Pinkfreud08
@K_Michael

Re-voting (following the COC guidelines of course) would be appreciated.

-->
@Ramshutu
@Pinkfreud08

*******************************************************************

IMPORTANT MOD NOTE: The counter bombs will NOT count against you. In the future, please use the report button.

*******************************************************************

-->
@Pinkfreud08

*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Pinkfreud08 // Mod Action: Removed

Points awarded: Full 7 points to Con except for conduct, which they give to pro.

RFD: Countering Ramshutu's poor vote bomb as he makes no attempt to argue why Wrick It Ralphs vote was unjust in the first place,

Until he/she gives me a just reason to believe Ralphs vote was poor, my vote bomb will still stand.

Reason for mod action: Counter vote bombs are removed via our standards.

The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************

-->
@K_Michael

*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: K_Michael // Mod Action: Removed

Points awarded: Full 7 points to Con

RFD: Fetuses are indeed, an impractical replacement for paper money. Bulky and spoil easily.

Reason for mod action: This is not a troll debate, thus all points need to be explained. The voter should review the COC.

The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************

-->
@Ramshutu

*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Ramshutu // Mod Action: Removed

Points awarded: 6 points to pro fo spelling, grammar, and sources; 1 point to con for conduct

RFD: Counter vote bomb. With the exception of one point, as I do actually think Ragnar won this. The reason is specifically due to the entertaining way he pointed out the storage issues, issues with vending machines and the issues with various forms of inflation; pointing out that USF is a replacement and not simply a type of gold standard replacement effectively nullifies any economic benefits and outweighed the benefits suggested by pro.

Reason for mod action: Counter vote bombs are removed via the COC. This is not a troll debate.

The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4
*******************************************************************

-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph

*******************************************************************
Vote Reported: Wrick-It-Ralph // Mod Action: Removed

Points awarded: Full 7 points to Con

RFD: I think I'm safe to assume that this is a troll debate. Even if I get counterbombed by ramshutu, I'll still be happy because then at least he's harassing someone else for a change :) (shameless plug for my debate)

While I find a good joke as entertaining as the next person. I don't really find jokes about fetuses to be funny in the least even when they're satirical. I vote con by virtue of his position being ever slightly more palatable than Pro's

Reason for mod action: This is borderline whether or not this is a troll debate, as such we are treating this as a non-troll debate given the serious nature of the arguments. Therefore, all points need to be explained per the COC.

The voter should review the COC here: https://www.debateart.com/rules
The voter should also review this: https://www.debateart.com/forum/topics/346?page=1&post_number=4

*******************************************************************

-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph

"by virtue of his position being ever slightly more palatable than Pro's"

Palatable... Delicious pun!

-->
@Barney

Ok, I will

-->
@Speedrace

I hope you enjoyed the rest of the debate. And of course, please vote.

-->
@Barney

I did provide the reason, directly prior to the link. "These fetuses currently have no value. ..." Admittedly, I meant moral value specifically because I didn't want to debate the morality of abortion.

Perhaps if you find it so easy to confuse his arguments with this supremacism the connection isn't entirely arbitrary. I never once mentioned it during the debate aside from using it to assist in framing, this is a conclusion you've drawn entirely on your own with no indication from myself.

-->
@Tiwaz

If not trying to straw-person certain arguments to which you lost the previous debate, then please inform us of your real intent and opinion of said arguments?

-->
@Barney

If I was straw-manning an opposing viewpoint it may have been more logical for me to have not chosen such a title. Something innocuous, if that was my goal, would have been a better choice.

-->
@Tiwaz

PHEW

-->
@Speedrace

--- DO NOT TAKE THIS COMMENT INTO CONSIDERATION IN ANY VOTES ---

Obviously this was not a serious debate, my real views are directly contrary to this.

goat

-->
@Barney

You’re a genius

-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph

Lol

-->
@Tiwaz

only about your mental status. lol

-->
@Wrick-It-Ralph

Do you have any more specific concerns?

-->
@Tiwaz

Oh dear.

-->
@Barney

Typo in my counter-argument, I meant to say "it's likely this will be banned in any other modern society."

-->
@Tiwaz

But is it how YOU choose to view it?

-->
@Speedrace

Sure, if that's how you choose to view it.

-->
@Tiwaz

Haha, that's a funny joke, right?

-->
@Barney

I made several typos, under the Feasibility section I meant to write "babies," not "children."

Take all the time you need.

-->
@Barney

I will post my argument later tonight or tomorrow, depending upon my schedule. I hope this doesn't inconvenience you.