The Instigator
Mas33
Con (against)
Tied
0 Points
The Contender
loomynarty
Pro (for)
Tied
0 Points

Abortion Should Be Banned in America

Do you like this debate?NoYes+1
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 0 votes the winner is...
It's a Tie!
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 1/25/2016 Category: Politics
Updated: 1 year ago Status: Post Voting Period
Viewed: 732 times Debate No: 85508
Debate Rounds (2)
Comments (4)
Votes (0)

 

Mas33

Con

Abortion should not be abolished. My first stance is that Americans have constitutional freedom, and the freedom to make a choice on whether to keep an (unborn) child or not is up to the woman. Do we have other forms of birth control? Yes. I could list them for you right now but that would waste valuable time. What we also have here is people who are either not ready or too poor to support a child. Would you like to be unwanted? Dirt poor? Malnourished? I sure wouldn't want to be, and I'm lucky not to. But, if abortion is abolished in America, we will have kids who grow up in the said unfortunate ways. Thank you for reading my argument.
loomynarty

Pro

True, the freedoms granted to us in the constitution are many. However, nowhere in the constitution is any provision made for any abortion. While there are indeed certain clauses that seemingly would allow them in principle, I see no place where it is stated, mainly because it was never an issue in the time of the founding of the US. Furthermore, My opponent has generalized those who will receive an abortion as those “who are either not ready or too poor to support a child.” While this summarizes some of those who will receive an abortion, this certainly cannot be true of all or even a majority of those who will receive an abortion. Then, my opponent uses an appeal to pity and asks the question “Would you like to be unwanted? Dirt poor? Malnourished?” As if the choice to ban abortion will lead to a bunch of poor malnourished children lying in the streets with cardboard signs saying “feed me” My opponent then states that if we ban abortion, the immediate result is children dying and suffering in this world. While this may be true for some cases, this is by no means a general rule. It also is a slippery slope, that if we do this one thing, this exact thing will happen to everyone, therefore, the first thing should not happen. While I did feel pity for those who my opponent described, I have found little logical basis for deciding that outlawing abortion would be wrong. Thanks! : )


Debate Round No. 1
Mas33

Con

I will pick up where I left off, but now with regards to my opponent and his arguments.

---CON: AMERICA NEEDS ABORTION---
Yes, a drastic statement that may have triggered some gasps among my audience, but wait, let me explain. On October 17, 2006, America hit the 300 million mark in population. It has gained 18.9 million people since then. Now, any graph will show that population is going up at a constant rate. We are still nowhere near as populated as China (1.357 billion as of 2013) or India (1.252 billion as of 2013) [1], but look at the conditions over there. Smog hugs the street lights of Beijing. A public service announcement called "Take The Poo To The Loo" was aired in India in April of 2014 [2] that fundamentally told people not to defecate in the streets, and if that isn't a distress signal for a country then I (and those on my side) don't know what is. You wonder why I'm telling you this. Well, the thing is, when population goes up, the quality of living goes down. I'm sure abortion happens in these places, but not as much as it does in America, but that's not even the point. I and my contender can both agree that population would be much higher (millions) if it weren't for abortion. As population increases, quality of living decreases (as you can see with India and their stinky situation). Now if I could go and ask any one of you at random, "Do you want our quality of living to decrease?" then the majority would say no, and they would be fools not to. This is exactly what we would be up against if abortion were criminalized. So ask yourself, Do you want this?

---PRO: OP IS WRONG---
That's basically the gist I got from your argument. You're honestly doing a heck of a job. Let's move on to your points, shall we?

(1). NO CONSTITUTIONAL EVIDENCE
My opponent states that "nowhere in the constitution is any provision made for any abortion". Think again. In the U.S. Supreme court decision of Roe v. Wade, the judicial branch decided that there is no constitutional clause protecting the unborn. In the end of this decision, the Supreme Court ruled that the fourteenth amendment expresses "a right of personal privacy" (560) and also ruled that the amendment "is broad enough to encompass a woman's decision whether or not to terminate her pregnancy." (561) [3].

(2). SOME BUT NOT MOST
My opponent says that the statement I made in the first round about people being too poor to support a child "cannot be true of all or even a majority of those who will receive an abortion". A study was put out by BMC Women's Health in 2013 which states the top three reasons American women get abortions. This study showed that 40% of women surveyed had abortions for financial reasons. Financial reasons ended up being "the most frequently mentioned theme". Of course, the women getting abortions had reasons other than that, but it mostly boiled down to general financial concerns like "[I] can't afford to support a child". This document [4] (which I will cite at the end) falsifies your claim.

(3). "APPEAL TO PITY"
I'll keep this one short due to its subjectivity.
I live in a small city in Texas, and I have been living there for fourteen years. Not too long ago I saw a mother with her two children on a highway easement with cardboard signs that suggested the reason they were there. Come on, I usually don't even feel the least bit sorry for these people, but this struck a nerve on me. To drag your kids onto a highway because you need spare change is just abysmal. I think I see a coincidence here: What i just described almost perfectly matches what you described in your round one rebuttal. Abortion is legal right now, and with 40% of reasons being financial, I can't see how I wouldn't see this at least one more time in the small town I live in if abortion were abolished, not to mention the bigger cities.

---Conclusion---
OP didn't seem to bring up any points of his own as to why abortion should be outlawed, but only attempted to disprove mine, which is a very interesting defensive strategy. I did the same thing in this round, and hope to see a rebuttal that matches my effort. My opponent also stated (before his 'cute' sign off) that he has "found little logical basis for deciding that outlawing abortion would be wrong". Well, for starters, one logical basis would be that the abortion is completely up to the woman, and that the aborted fetuses can be donated to stem cell research. Try building on that.

Thank you for reading my second and final argument.

SOURCES BY THE NUMBERS:

(1). Population of America, China, and India: https://www.google.com...

(2). "Take The Poo To The Loo" PSA: http://www.huffingtonpost.com...

(3). Abortion by Law: http://law.justia.com...

(4). BioMed Central Women's Health Survey: http://download.springer.com...*~hmac=fe3bc0a5d63280c0e3e31645092e1f534585a9c206d406751c00a873d590e795
loomynarty

Pro

loomynarty forfeited this round.
Debate Round No. 2
4 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 4 records.
Posted by JOHNCENA1738 1 year ago
JOHNCENA1738
It suprises me that abortion is even legal! The constitution clearly contradicts itself. IT says that all men are created equal and freedom for every living thing, but the next they are letting unborn babies (who can not express their will) be executed by big coorperate companies that are stocking up money from the "poor" women that can still somehow afford the procedure itself! Use that 400 dollars to get a job.
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: Jevinigh// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Obviously all points are going to Con.

[*Reason for removal*] While this was a full forfeit debate, Pro did clearly make an argument in the opening round, and especially as there were only 2 rounds here, the voter must assess it. As such, none of the points are justified.
************************************************************************
Posted by whiteflame 1 year ago
whiteflame
*******************************************************************
>Reported vote: LostintheEcho1498// Mod action: Removed<

7 points to Con. Reasons for voting decision: Entire forfeit by Pro. Honestly, very disappointing. One of my biggest pet peeves is when people just forfeit. Props to Con for making an actual argument and sticking with it.

[*Reason for removal*] While this was a full forfeit debate, Pro did clearly make an argument in the opening round, and especially as there were only 2 rounds here, the voter must assess it. As such, none of the points are justified.
************************************************************************
Posted by ViceRegent 1 year ago
ViceRegent
Yes, with those who practice in it executed.
No votes have been placed for this debate.