The Instigator
BrosefJoe
Pro (for)
Losing
1 Points
The Contender
Juris
Con (against)
Winning
15 Points

Abortion Is Not Murder

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  
Post Voting Period
The voting period for this debate has ended.
after 3 votes the winner is...
Juris
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/3/2013 Category: Society
Updated: 3 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 1,669 times Debate No: 38422
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (3)
Votes (3)

 

BrosefJoe

Pro

I will be arguing that abortion is not murder.
Juris

Con

I accept the challenge. I will defend that abortion is killing(murder)
Debate Round No. 1
BrosefJoe

Pro

Assuming that murder is considered the killing of a human being, I don't understand how abortion could be considered as such. A fetus is not a human being, and the human experience does not begin until the organism is able to perceive the outside world and form memories. The formation of the fetus is merely the formation of the infrastructure of a future human being, however complex the process may be.
Juris

Con

Abortion is murder. Each abortion snuffs out an innocent human life. Tragically, doctors have deceived the American public. Referring to unborn babies as “fetus,” “ embryo,” or “zygote,” may be scientifically correct, but does not change the fact: These little ones are little human beings. Though called “parasite,” “blob,” or “tissue,” give each wee creature about 266 days after conception and see what emerges from his mother’s womb. It will be a human baby, not a zebra, a trout, frog or an orangutan.1

Another, Dr. Micheline M. Mathews-Roth, Harvard Medical School, referenced medical textbooks that claimed that human life begins at conception. Dr. Jerome Lejeune, "Father of Modern Genetics," stated, "To accept the fact that after fertilization has taken place, a new human has come into being is no longer a matter of taste or opinion ... it is plain experimental evidence." Dr. Hymie Gordon, Chairman Department of Genetics at the Mayo Clinic, added: "By all the criteria of modern molecular biology, life is present from the moment of conception."2

These were just a few of the statements made by world-renowned professionals. Whether or not the law says that abortion is murder, the Bible clearly holds the life of the unborn as supremely important.

"For you [God] created my inmost being; you knit me together in my mother's womb" (Psalm 139:13).

"Before I formed thee in the belly I knew thee; and before thou camest forth out of the womb Isanctioned thee, and I ordained thee a prophet unto the nations"(Jeremiah 1:5).

"Thou shalt not kill" (Exodus 20:13).




sources:
[1] http://www.jesus-is-savior.com...

[2] http://www.raptureready.com...
Debate Round No. 2
BrosefJoe

Pro

First off, I really don't care what the Bible says.

And you didn't provide any supporting argument for your claim. Sure, after birth, you will have a maturing person. But abortion happens before birth.
Juris

Con


What? Excuse me; you have the burden of proving that abortion is not murder, so far you haven’t shown any evidence for that. On the other hand, I have provided arguments for my claim supported by expert opinion and among others.

No wonder, why you don’t care about the life of the unborn, because you don’t care about the moral teachings of the Bible. You accept murder because you don’t believe in the statement"Thou shalt not kill" (Exodus 20:13).

Without a doubt, I should win this debate. Thanks.

Debate Round No. 3
3 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Posted by jetliner 3 years ago
jetliner
The huge crutch of religion by Con makes this debate a tie for me. Pro didn't really have an argument, and Con tried to inject religion. Debate is a tie for me, both lose.
Posted by airmax1227 3 years ago
airmax1227
The burden of proof in this debate is on Pro who must establish the resolution by backing up his assertions. He unfortunately never does this within the context of this debate. While it may be incumbent on the generalized pro side for human life (ie; a fetus is a "human") to establish that with the burden of proof, in this case Pro must at least refute Cons source backed assertions that it is human life, something that Pro never does.

What is important here is that while the science behind this very complex discussion may not be really addressed in this debate, Con at least provides something credible to relate to it by quoting a few doctors. Pro certainly could have refuted these arguments (and negated them entirely) had he actually quoted equally credible sources saying the opposite, yet he chooses not to for whatever reason. For this reason source points go to Con. Furthermore, while the reliability of the bible as a source is certainly debatable, Pro's only argument against it is "I really don't care what the Bible says". This isn't a sufficient rebuttal as it could be said about any source. So it stands as another unopposed source for the side negating the resolution.

As for arguments: Pro fails on his BOP in his R3 by not responding at all to Cons arguments. Con established that some believe it is a human life, and that an ancient text says it's wrong. Pros response didn't attempt to rebut either of these things (And creating doubt via the bibles scientific validity should be a simple matter). While Con certainly hasn't established that it is murder with these arguments, the BOP here is on Pro who must show that these sources are wrong, or provide equal or greater reasons why the opposite is true, something he failed to do. So argument points to Con who successfully prevented Pro from establishing the resolution.
Posted by suraj1988 3 years ago
suraj1988
It is a murder and i fact a heinous deed, because of many reasons:- 1st> The time when a womb has the bag where in the birth has taken place, the life start existing there, once it has taken the form of human being doesn't matter if that is girl or boy the soul exist in it, and now when you have killed the life of that soul who doesn't even came to this world !!
3 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 3 records.
Vote Placed by SPENCERJOYAGE14 3 years ago
SPENCERJOYAGE14
BrosefJoeJurisTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: I'm voting a tie on conduct because Con had a very unnecessary personal attack on Pro in the last round, But Pro said, "I don't care." And that is something you do not say during a debate round even if it's true. Con made more convincing arguments and used the most reliable source, because he actually debated the round when Pro didn't really say anything significant.
Vote Placed by Weiler 3 years ago
Weiler
BrosefJoeJurisTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:15 
Reasons for voting decision: Conduct points to pro, con's personal attack in the last round was WAY out of bounds.
Vote Placed by airmax1227 3 years ago
airmax1227
BrosefJoeJurisTied
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 Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Reasons for voting decision: RFD in comments