The best online Debate website - DebateIsland.com! The only Online Debate Website with Casual, Persuade Me, Formalish, and Formal Online Debate formats. We’re the Leading Online Debate website. Debate popular topics, Debate news, or Debate anything! Debate online for free! Should taxpayers be forced to fund some woman's abortion?in Politics

YeshuaRedeemed

For neutrality's sake, I will only comment in the comment section?

funperson

No

DarrickJohnston

As any other elective surgery it should be properly subsidized and controlled and so should undergo the scrutiny. Also services should always be offered equally to people without the rationale or economic viability to participate.  

MayCaesar

Nobody should be "forced" to do anything in a free society. If one wants to fund someone else's abortion procedure, they can always directly donate to that person, or to a charity that will spend the money accordingly. And if not, then, moral or not, it is their right to spend their money on themselves or on someone else they want to spend their money on.

cheesycheese

MayCaesar said:

Nobody should be "forced" to do anything in a free society. If one wants to fund someone else's abortion procedure, they can always directly donate to that person, or to a charity that will spend the money accordingly. And if not, then, moral or not, it is their right to spend their money on themselves or on someone else they want to spend their money on.

what about being forced to not kill is that ok

YeshuaRedeemed

@funperson Agreed.

YeshuaRedeemed

cheesycheese said:

MayCaesar said:

Nobody should be "forced" to do anything in a free society. If one wants to fund someone else's abortion procedure, they can always directly donate to that person, or to a charity that will spend the money accordingly. And if not, then, moral or not, it is their right to spend their money on themselves or on someone else they want to spend their money on.

what about being forced to not kill is that ok
That is a good point. I saw the pictures, and I am prolife.

YeshuaRedeemed

@DarrickJohnston No. I have the Christian right to not pay for that which goes against my religion.

MayCaesar

@cheesycheese

The phrase "forced to not kill" makes no sense, because not killing does not constitute an action.

John_C_87

The constitutional issue in this question is that a misrepresentation of a admission of guilt placed in a united state with the democratic  public is used to ignore the other crimes that are going on that are not admitted and are simple harder to prove. The cost and burden of proof does not mean at some time in the future these crimes cannot be enforced by law and cost the public a civil Right, their constitutional right to vote.

Tax funding will undoubtable need to be directed at some point to the judicial separation process that should have been occurring on any admission of guilt on a known felony. Also it should be noted that science has been performing abortion with taxation funding. As In Vitro fertilization research is linked directly to abortion as a process it simple removes the woman from any control fertilization of an egg. 

As a common defense to a general welfare at this point the description of female specific amputation would be an address to Constitutional privacy issue describe by Roe vs Wade