The Instigator
countrylover
Con (against)
Losing
21 Points
The Contender
A-ThiestSocialist
Pro (for)
Winning
54 Points

Abortion-For or Against?

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/13/2007 Category: Health
Updated: 9 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 2,128 times Debate No: 396
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (9)
Votes (25)

 

countrylover

Con

I am against abortion..its not hard for anyone to know why...if a woman is pregnant...then she knows that she has a baby in her that will be growing...so the development of the baby at the earliest point of her pregnancy woudnt matter cause it takes life for her to be pregnant.....evryone knows that...thats why someone can hurt a pregnenant woman and if the baby in her get kill then he will get in trouble...cause that is a living bieng in here...life dont begin when the baby is born....by that time the baby will be 8 or 9 months old..ect.
A-ThiestSocialist

Pro

First, all those voting, when voting on this issue please don't vote how you feel, vote on the debate.

I do not find abortion morally justified or correct, but I am against government regulation of it.

An economist article of a few weeks ago analyzed that out of countries who have and haven't banned abortion, rates were the same, the only difference: injuries in abortive processes were higher in countries where it was illegal. The study found that women will get an abortion basically no matter what, if they have to get one. I'm arguing here for safety, and I can't really allow the government to force women to do something illegally that will put them in more harm, when there is a better way.

Also, I don't believe the government should hold a gun to a women's head and prevent her from a medical process. The regulatory power of the government would continue growing, and soon we'd have government intervening in areas that are family matters.
Debate Round No. 1
countrylover

Con

you say that woman will get an abortion no matter what if they wanted one.....thats not a reason to allow abortion and say thats its ok...2 wrongs dont make a right....abortion is worse then a person abusing a child...cause abortion says its ok to kill...this aint about a "womans right"........if a woman is allowed to kill her baby before its born..then she should be allowed to kill the baby after he is born....oh...but the thing is..that when the baby is born that they will have to face the fact that they cant just go ahaed and kill it....if a woman dont want a kid..she shouldnt be getting pregnant...i bet that same woman that wants an abortion would get someone in trouble if they was to hit her in the stomach and the baby gets killed cause of it...Of Course!!....so why is the mother allowed to go to a clinic and have a utensell jabbed through the head of the baby and it be "her choice" and justified...just cause the law says something is legel..dont make it right...you should just then say that killing a kid is ok as long as there not a certain age.....oh..they will see that as wrong..thats only cause there wasnt a law that justified it..if so peaple will be dumb enough to think thats ok also..too me killing a baby before its born aint no different then killing it after its born....oh..but peaple think of themselves...and its pretty convenient to just go kill your baby if you dont want it...if abortion was never legell..peaple would see it for what it is...killing!
A-ThiestSocialist

Pro

Sorry for the long response, school is a little time costly.

"You say that woman will get an abortion no matter what if they wanted one.....thats not a reason to allow abortion and say thats its ok...2 wrongs dont make a right....abortion is worse then a person abusing a child...cause abortion says its ok to kill...this aint about a "womans right"."

Your refutation of my main point basically misinterprets it completely. I'm not saying "2 wrongs make a right" I'm saying that people will try and get an abortion no matter what as the evidence I have presented shows. There are two options, either the government permits safe methods in which few women will be hurt, or forces women to perform dangerous illegal abortions which risk her life. The government can't take such an authoritarian role in a medical procedure. It's interesting that religiously life begins at conception, however countries with no separation of church and state are commonly pro-choice. The issue is about safety for the woman and privacy. If you want big brother telling you what to do, then by all means step back into the herd.

".if a woman is allowed to kill her baby before its born..then she should be allowed to kill the baby after he is born....oh...but the thing is..that when the baby is born that they will have to face the fact that they cant just go ahaed and kill it....if a woman dont want a kid..she shouldnt be getting pregnant...i bet that same woman that wants an abortion would get someone in trouble if they was to hit her in the stomach and the baby gets killed cause of it...Of Course!!....so why is the mother allowed to go to a clinic and have a utensell jabbed through the head of the baby and it be "her choice" and justified...just cause the law says something is legel..dont make it right...you should just then say that killing a kid is ok as long as there not a certain age.....oh..they will see that as wrong..thats only cause there wasnt a law that justified it..if so peaple will be dumb enough to think thats ok also..too me killing a baby before its born aint no different then killing it after its born....oh..but peaple think of themselves...and its pretty convenient to just go kill your baby if you dont want it...if abortion was never legell..peaple would see it for what it is...killing!"

You make many assertions in here which really don't have that many impacts on the round, so I'm simply going to refute the major ones. First, a women should be allowed to conduct a medical procedure that is in her best interests at the time and one in which reflects her medical privacy. Life isn't clearly defined legally, so we can't necessarily define abortion as murder on a legal sense. Okay, next "jabbed through the head" abortions are already illegal now in the US, there's a federal ban on partial birth abortions, so it's irrelevant. Next you say that legal definitions don't justify right and wrong, and I'll agree with you, however I have stated that I don't condone abortion, but I also don't condone it's regulation. The government's role isn't to step inside of familiies and control people's lives as you suggest.

Next I have a question, do you support government welfare?

The major issue in this round is do we want a government that oversteps it's boundaries, takes the place of families, and intervenes in our medical procedures. Also, do we want a government that acts on the worst behalf of its' citizens, and ignores the facts of the matter. The fact is, a woman will sadly abort her child if she finds it necessary, and the government shouldn't force her to do it in a life threatening way.
Debate Round No. 2
countrylover

Con

Here is what you said "Life isn't clearly defined legally, so we can't necessarily define abortion as murder on a legal sense.".....what do you mean life is not defined legallly?......you can try to "explain away" whatever you want....but me,you and evryone else knows what life is....nomatter what the law says...pregnancy means that there is a baby on the way...and to stop that would be to kill...and in your case of saying that some woman will do whatever to have an abortion or get rid of there baby...thats there fault...not the rest of the worlds....if a woman was to get pregnant...then try to kill her baby...she shoulf get in trouble...just like the person who hit her and killed the baby should get in trouble...it aint the babys fault that the mother cant keep the factory closed intill the right time...on the other hand...while this "abortion" thing is legal..there are going to be PLENTY if woman who will be less to worry..be less strict on themselves about having sex...cause they will say to themselves.."hmm...well if i get pregnant..i will just have an abortion".....so this dont lessen the problem..but makes it worse....I just can't help but to see it for what it is....i'm NOT going to look at it at a different angle cause a friend of mine or whatever wants an abortion...or even if I had a daughter and she wanted one...i would still be against it....if abortion was illigal..then maybee peaple will think twice before quickly getting into things that make them be pregnant....but no..this is America...peaple are so spoiled that they dont know right from wrong anymore...and they can always find things to justify the bad instead of trying to improve and make it better.
A-ThiestSocialist

Pro

Okay, arguing here without an emmense amouth of pathos, I'm going to say why I have won this debate. The fact is, my opponents arguments are partially true. But he hasn't really combatted my explainations and my case. The resolution says abortion for or against, and requries a further explanation. I explained my position, and not once did my opponent directly refute my qualifying resoning. He simply said, abortion is wrong. I agree, but he didn't refute the fact that government regulation is wrong also. By ignoring this, and failure to clarify, he lost the round.

He also neglected to answer my question on supporting welfare, so judging by his views in his profile, I'll have to assume no. It's always ironic how people are against abortion, but don't want to give incentives to have the child, and make sure that once the child is born, it has a healthy and successful life.

Finally, in his overall analysis, he simply asserts continually what women may do, or what they should do. Practically his whole entire third post is contradicted by the economist article I presented earlier. My opponent thinks that government regulation would change things. It would change things, but not the right things. Goverment regulation would simply force women to perform the operation illegally, and harm themselves. Abortion rates would NOT go down. Finally, the best way to solve this problem as seen as a resultant is provide incentives to have the child, and make sure that women can afford it. Through this, not only are we actually saving lives, and the lives of the mothers, but we're helping our people and respecting their privacy.
Debate Round No. 3
9 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 9 records.
Posted by jurist24 9 years ago
jurist24
Quote, via countrylover:

"if abortion was illigal..then maybee peaple will think twice before quickly getting into things that make them be pregnant"

No, people will always rush headlong into a compromising position. No pun intended.
Posted by Luigi_Umberto 9 years ago
Luigi_Umberto
The irony to all this is.. that those who say killing is wrong generally support the death penalty and military action in Iraq.. thats just contradicting.. Abortion should always be a woman's choice except for late term abortions.. sorry procrastinators
Posted by ruth421963 9 years ago
ruth421963
I have always felt {given the right reasons}
it would be "okay to take a life as long
as the fetus remains under 3mos".
However Countrylover has taken it
down to thee simpliest terms...Killing
is killing....you can't get past that.
Hope, Happiness & Peace,
Ruth
Posted by Heller 9 years ago
Heller
Just remember one thing, Killing is wrong!
Posted by MWorley 9 years ago
MWorley
Contrylover, you lost. This is a debate, and you don't seem to understand that.
Posted by countrylover 9 years ago
countrylover
Life is Life..rather I or anyone else says it is or not...there is nothing to "define" about it.
Posted by DaltonDem 9 years ago
DaltonDem
Here I agree with A-theist socialist because who are you to define life? Who are you to dictate what a woman wants to do with her body?
Posted by shorty 9 years ago
shorty
I agree with countrylover also..to take life away would be to kill..you cant talk or minipulate the truth...so abortion for what it is
Posted by Heller 9 years ago
Heller
I agree with you country lover...I'm in the middle of the same debate right now. Check it out then.
25 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 10 records.
Vote Placed by kenito001 9 years ago
kenito001
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by buckaroo54 9 years ago
buckaroo54
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by lindsay 9 years ago
lindsay
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by ccdem 9 years ago
ccdem
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by aaltobartok 9 years ago
aaltobartok
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Tatarize 9 years ago
Tatarize
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by Alex_Edwards 9 years ago
Alex_Edwards
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03 
Vote Placed by liberalconservative 9 years ago
liberalconservative
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by Wharrel 9 years ago
Wharrel
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:30 
Vote Placed by jurist24 9 years ago
jurist24
countryloverA-ThiestSocialistTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:--Vote Checkmark2 points
Total points awarded:03