The Instigator
rugbypro5
Pro (for)
Winning
22 Points
The Contender
Malec-M
Con (against)
Losing
0 Points

Abortion Is Wrong

Do you like this debate?NoYes+2
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 4 votes the winner is...
rugbypro5
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 10/21/2014 Category: Society
Updated: 2 years ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 543 times Debate No: 63677
Debate Rounds (4)
Comments (0)
Votes (4)

 

rugbypro5

Pro

I am taking the stance that abortion is wrong in all cases except for when the mother's life is in danger. Feel free to post your first argument in the first round. Good luck.
Malec-M

Con

I do believe that there are more scenerios than just the mothers life when abortion can be ok. I accept
Debate Round No. 1
rugbypro5

Pro

Thank you Con for accepting, and I hope that we have a good debate.

I'd like to start by stating this: I will concede my argument and concede my stance. I no longer believe that abortion should be restricted and that women should have full liberty to do what they want to do. If. If what? If you can prove beyond a reasonable doubt that these two premises aren't true. 1) The unborn are human. 2) The unborn are alive. If you can give me good reasons using logic, science and/or philosophy, that these two premises are in fact false, then I will admit that the unborn have no more right to live than a cow or a bed bug; however, if the statements are true, then I believe that the unborn should have rights like you and I, and should not be given less value.

This is the philosophical and scientific reasoning for belief that the two premises are true.

1) The unborn are human.
The world's leading embryology textbooks give arguably un-refutable scientific evidence for the unborns' humanity as shown here in Keith Moore's "Essentials of Human Embryology": "Human development begins after the union of male and female gametes or germ cells during a process known as fertilization (conception).
"Fertilization is a sequence of events that begins with the contact of a sperm (spermatozoon) with a secondary oocyte (ovum) and ends with the fusion of their pronuclei (the haploid nuclei of the sperm and ovum) and the mingling of their chromosomes to form a new cell. This fertilized ovum, known as a zygote, is a large diploid cell that is the beginning, or primordium, of a human being."
[Moore, Keith L. Essentials of Human Embryology. Toronto: B.C. Decker Inc, 1988, p.2]

Also here in Dr. Langmans textbook: "The development of a human being begins with fertilization, a process by which two highly specialized cells, the spermatozoon from the male and the oocyte from the female, unite to give rise to a new organism, the zygote."
[Langman, Jan. Medical Embryology. 3rd edition. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1975, p. 3]

I have a very high confidence that almost all, if not every embryology textbook will state that anyone's humanity started from the moment of conception.

2) The unborn are alive.
According to the Oxford Dictionary (http://www.oxforddictionaries.com...), life is defined as: The condition that distinguishes animals and plants from inorganic matter, including the capacity for growth, reproduction, functional activity, and continual change preceding death.

It's obvious to see that a fetus, from the moment of conception, contains the capacity or is currently acting out each of the four requirements given. They are constantly growing, they have the capacity for reproduction, there is constantly functional activity, and there will be continuous change preceding death... Which hopefully won't come in the next few months.

Now I have provided solid evidence that the unborn are alive, whole human beings, therefore, being given the right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness, emphasizing the right to life: the right from which all others are derived. Now there are a few possible rebuttals, but instead of attacking straw men, I will simply allow my opponent to provide his reasons for supporting abortion.
Malec-M

Con

Malec-M forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
rugbypro5

Pro

My basic arguments for my pro-life beliefs can be summed up in the acronym SLED.

S- Size: Yes, the embryo is very small, and at its earliest stages it's no more than a single cell. However, humans do not gain their value based on their size. If that were the case, men, who are usually bigger than women, would necessarily have more value. A human's value doesn't change based on its size.
L- Level of Development: Many arguments the pro-choice movement revolve around the belief that because the embryo hasn't developed certain attributes, we have justification to terminate their lives, attributes like cognitive brain function, a beating heart and the ability to feel pain. But where does this hold up outside of the womb? A five year old girl is much less developed than an 18 year old. In fact, the 5 year old hasn't even developed the ability to reproduce, but certainly we don't say we are justified in killing that little girl simply due to the fact she isn't fully developed. In fact, under that same ideology, anyone under the age of 40 could be killed "justly", because humans don't reach their full level of development until around that age. So a human's value isn't contingent on its level of development.
E- Environment: Another contention against the pro-life movement is based around the fact that the embryo is still inside the womb. I would then ask, "Why does that matter? Do human being's value change based on their location? I mean, did you or I change who we are when we walk into a new room, or a school, or home? That's silly. So why should we grant value to children only when they move 8 inches from the womb through the birth canal? Human's value is not contingent on their location.
D- Degree of dependency: While in the womb, a fetus is 100% dependent on its mother. She is its protection and provision. But does this grant women the power to end its life, simply due to the fact that it's dependent on her and her actions? Let's see. I was never fully independent of my parents until I was 17 and moved out. Before then, from birth to 3 or 4 years of age, I was still arguably 100% dependent on my parents supplying me with food and keeping me from dying. Yet that gave them no right to terminate my life at their whim as soon as I became inconvenient or they couldn't afford me. So degree of dependency doesn't decide the amount of value someone has a human being.

That's SLED, a simple acronym to help you remember many of the flaws in many pro-choice argument. And my basic belief why the pro-choice movement doesn't make sense.
Malec-M

Con

Malec-M forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 3
rugbypro5

Pro

Vote pro.
Malec-M

Con

Malec-M forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 4
No comments have been posted on this debate.
4 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Vote Placed by wolf24 2 years ago
wolf24
rugbypro5Malec-MTied
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 Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Reasons for voting decision: Pro had a better everything. All points go to pro. Reason: Con didn't post anything.
Vote Placed by lannan13 2 years ago
lannan13
rugbypro5Malec-MTied
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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Forfeiture
Vote Placed by dsjpk5 2 years ago
dsjpk5
rugbypro5Malec-MTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 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:60 
Reasons for voting decision: Con ff several times, so conduct to pro. Pro made a very strong argument, con didn't, do arguments to pro. Only pro offered sources, so sources to pro.
Vote Placed by Imperfiect 2 years ago
Imperfiect
rugbypro5Malec-MTied
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 
Reasons for voting decision: FF